From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from emea01-db3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db3on0095.outbound.protection.outlook.com [157.55.234.95]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB6C4A63 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 10:46:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from DB3PR01MB0761.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.160.53.14) by DB3PR01MB0762.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.160.53.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.331.20; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 09:46:47 +0000 Received: from DB3PR01MB0761.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.160.53.14]) by DB3PR01MB0761.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.160.53.14]) with mapi id 15.01.0331.023; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 09:46:46 +0000 From: Kury Nicolas To: Stephen Hemminger , "mike.a.polehn@intel.com" , "jim.st.leger@intel.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Does anybody know OpenDataPlane Thread-Index: AQHRLa+G6fSNa7FRbE6y00/bH+HIfw== Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 09:46:46 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=nicolas.kury@master.hes-so.ch; x-originating-ip: [157.56.255.229] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB3PR01MB0762; 5:SySdFLPJP++O+nRJ0o+LGYBIzuyHXoJ59fnANTtG6R300k9z2zoeueMJLiTvU+lSo+BhFs6ipFy4OxfT0xc426kyX5Dhr/OJI3oK7mnjMV9PxxG6Tua3nd697xUvZVS1TDqOJK/eUHmnax35RcYD9w==; 24:2ERq4Hipz0x9VYii+PZZfflfRQXQ9jqhkoiGbd/KgxL4GTZWuLZYk+PTfm8kneOqYvi2lLYRdBw2uJGb7tRyEj4DNuer/cJKnU38TCIAphA= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB3PR01MB0762; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(228905959029699); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:DB3PR01MB0762; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB3PR01MB0762; x-forefront-prvs: 077929D941 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(13464003)(469094003)(76104003)(189002)(199003)(377454003)(53484002)(45984002)(74316001)(5002640100001)(5004730100002)(15395725005)(1220700001)(107886002)(5001960100002)(40100003)(50986999)(66066001)(77096005)(5880100001)(102836003)(3846002)(6116002)(122556002)(2501003)(10400500002)(189998001)(92566002)(1096002)(5001770100001)(81156007)(97736004)(54356999)(19580405001)(19580395003)(106356001)(87936001)(586003)(105586002)(15975445007)(106116001)(2900100001)(5008740100001)(5003600100002)(74482002)(101416001)(2201001)(33656002)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DB3PR01MB0762; H:DB3PR01MB0761.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:0; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: master.hes-so.ch does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: master.hes-so.ch X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 03 Dec 2015 09:46:46.4830 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a372f724-c0b2-4ea0-abfb-0eb8c6f84e40 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB3PR01MB0762 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Does anybody know OpenDataPlane X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 09:46:49 -0000 Hi Thank you everybody for your answers! @Jim I choose ODP as project because it was something new and I wanted to know m= ore about the subject. =20 I have read many documents about OpenDataPlane, I have tried it, implemente= d a small application, made some measures of throughput, etc. I know more o= r less what ODP is. One of my main objectives is to see how much overhead O= DP adds compared to the native SDK (DPDK, USDPAA ...). Then, to try OpenDat= aPlane on 2 different platforms and see if my application's portability is = good (same code, or few changes). I have also to see if OpenDataPlane is a = "good solution" to easily port Open vSwitch on different platform.=20 I have asked folks from Linaro and I have their point of view. I think it i= s also important to have your point of view. It is the reason why I asked y= ou. > Across these two spectrums and comparing ODP to DPDK is a fundamental phi= losophy of how much software should be open sourced vs left up to the semic= onductor vendor [...] I haven't thought about this point, interessting. > The ARM community (ARM, Nokia, ENEA) are starting a new project called Op= en Fast Path http://openfastpath.org/. [...] Yes I have seen this project. I have also seen that DPDK is also in discuss= ion to developp a networking stack. @Mike > you are just beginning your research or do not understand how this fits i= nto current telco NFV/SDN efforts. It's difficult to get new information about OpenDataPlane on Internet. Ther= e is only a website with documentation and their philosophy. Yes, I didn't = know how ODP will fit with NFV/SDN. I will focus my research in this domain= , thank you for the idea. > Maybe you can change your thesis to "Current Open Source Dataplane Method= s": and do a comparison between the two. However if you just look at the s= ales documentation then you may not understand the real difference. By "DataPlane methods", do you mean virtual switches (VEB, VEPA), PCI passt= hrough, etc. ? > One originated somewhat more from the embedded orientation and one origin= ated somewhat more from the server orientation [...] OpenDataPlane provides portability, don't you think it would be usefull to = move from an orientation to another (from server to embedded or vise versa)= ? Or it's something it never happens, a company never change its orientati= on ? What you think is : if my orientation is server, I should use DPDK. But if = my orentiation is embedded, I schould use ODP because there are lots of dif= ferent kind of System on Chip and in this case, ODP would be usefull for po= rtability. That's what you think ? Thank you again! Nicolas ________________________________________ De : Polehn, Mike A Envoy=E9 : mercredi 2 d=E9cembre 2015 17:49 =C0 : Polehn, Mike A; Kury Nicolas; dev@dpdk.org Objet : RE: Does anybody know OpenDataPlane A hint of the fundamental difference: One originated somewhat more from the embedded orientation and one originat= ed somewhat more from the server orientation. Both efforts are driving each= towards the other and have overlap. Mike ________________________________________ De : Stephen Hemminger Envoy=E9 : mercredi 2 d=E9cembre 2015 17:45 =C0 : Kury Nicolas Objet : Re: [dpdk-dev] Does anybody know OpenDataPlane OpenDataPlane is actually a misnomer, it is really about providing an open (for anyone to use) API for closed source hardware platforms. ________________________________________ De : Polehn, Mike A Envoy=E9 : mercredi 2 d=E9cembre 2015 17:32 =C0 : Kury Nicolas; dev@dpdk.org Objet : RE: Does anybody know OpenDataPlane I don't think you have researched this enough. Asking this questions shows that you are just beginning your research or do= not understand how this fits into current telco NFV/SDN efforts. Why does this exist: "OpenDataPlane using DPDK for Intel NIC", listed below= ? Why would competing technologies use the competition technology to solve = a problem? Maybe you can change your thesis to "Current Open Source Dataplane Methods"= : and do a comparison between the two. However if you just look at the sal= es documentation then you may not understand the real difference. Mike ________________________________________ De : St Leger, Jim Envoy=E9 : mercredi 2 d=E9cembre 2015 16:18 =C0 : Kury Nicolas Objet : RE: Does anybody know OpenDataPlane Kury: Congrats on selecting your masters' thesis. What caused you to choose ODP = as the subject? On the dev@dpdk.org list are many folks from the ARM and Linaro community. = If you don't already know about Linaro and the Linaro Networking Group (LN= G) you might do some initial research there. I am sure they will respond w= ith their views on why ODP was created the value they believe it brings to = the networking world. The ODP philosophy is fundamentally different from DPDK. It believes in es= tablishing a higher level common API that allows portability of application= s across theoretically many architectures and many platforms underneath. I= f you consider the ARM licensee model it is something necessary to abstract= customers from one ARM solution not being compatible with another ARM solu= tion (which happens today across MIPS, ARM, and I'd guess other solutions.) >>From here the semiconductor vendor would then provide an underlying SDK and= /or shim layer to go from their own optimized API design (everyone has one)= to the ODP API. As with all things in software, shim layers always introd= uce some level of performance penalty. Across these two spectrums and comparing ODP to DPDK is a fundamental philo= sophy of how much software should be open sourced vs left up to the semicon= ductor vendor. The DPDK model is to do as much as possible in then open so= urce community, all the way down to the low level polling mode drivers (PMD= s.) The ODP model leaves everything below the ODP API alone, letting the s= emiconductor vendor decide what to do. In most cases they opt for a propri= etary SDK, often also sold as a commercial software solution. This is clea= rly in strong contrast to DPDK which is based on open and free. One other thing to look at: The ARM community (ARM, Nokia, ENEA) are starti= ng a new project called Open Fast Path http://openfastpath.org/. In many wa= ys this is in contrast with the ODP model is that it aims to develop a user= space TCP/IP stack that works on top of ODP. I personally find this a bit = ironic in that the ODP concept would historically say that work of this typ= e is NOT part of the open source community (surely not part of ODP) and thu= s left for the semiconductor OEMs to figure out and provide. Maybe this is= a compromise position? I don't know... You will have to digest all of the differing views out there. Consider als= o market traction. DPDK today has a very strong, robust community with con= siderable adoption and uptake across the equipment and service provider cus= tomer base. Anyone can join the project for $0 and get engaged. Linaro pr= ojects require membership, which I believe to be quite expensive (I think y= ou can find the data, but I believe it's $100-500k.) I do, however, think = it's possible to contribute to a Linaro product such as ODP w/o being a mem= ber. The Linaro project and ODP has a strong list of participant names. B= ut the project is not nearly as mature as DPDK is today. We'll see what th= e future brings. I hope this helps some. You can balance it against views you're likely to = get from folks who are more directly involved in LNG and ODP. Cheers, Jim -----Original Message----- From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Kury Nicolas Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 7:22 AM To: dev@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-dev] Does anybody know OpenDataPlane Hi! Does anybody know OpenDataPlane ? http://www.opendataplane.org/ It is a fr= amework designed to enable software portability between networking SoCs, re= gardless of the underlying instruction set architecture. There are several = implementations. * OpenDataPlane using DPDK for Intel NIC * OpenDataPlane using DPAA for Freescale platforms (QorIQ) * OpenDataPlane using MCSDK for Texas Insturments platforms (KeyStone I= I) * etc. When a developer wants to port his application, he just needs to recompile = it with the implementation of OpenDataPlane related to the new platform. I'm doing my Master's Thesis on OpenDataPlane and I have some questions. - Now that OpenDataPlane (ODP) exists, schould every developpers start a ne= w project with ODP or are there some reasons to still use DPDK ? What do yo= u think ? Thank you very much Nicolas