DPDK usage discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [dpdk-users] Project Governance and Linux Foundation
@ 2016-10-10  8:33 O'Driscoll, Tim
  2016-10-17 10:23 ` Hobywan Kenoby
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 24+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2016-10-10  8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev, users

This email is being sent on behalf of: Cavium, Cisco, Intel, NXP & Red Hat.


Since its creation as an open source project in 2013, DPDK has grown significantly. The number of DPDK users, contributors, commercial products that use DPDK and open source projects that depend on it have all increased consistently over that time. DPDK is now a key ingredient in networking and NFV, and we need to ensure that the project structure and governance are appropriate for such a critical project, and that they facilitate the project's continued growth.

For over a year now we've been discussing moving DPDK to the Linux Foundation. We believe it's now time to conclude that discussion and make the move. The benefits of doing this would include:
- The infrastructure for a project like DPDK should not be owned and controlled by any single company.
- Remove any remaining perception that DPDK is not truly open.
- Allow the project to avail of the infrastructure and services provided by the Linux Foundation. These include things like: Ability to host infrastructure for integration and testing (the FD.io CSIT lab is an example of this - see https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/CSIT_LF_testbed); Support for legal issues including trademarks and branding, and the ability to sign agreements on behalf of the project; Ability to pool resources for events and brand promotion; Safe haven for community IP resources.

We don't propose to debate the details here. Instead, an open discussion session on DPDK Project Growth has been included in the agenda for the DPDK Summit Userspace 2016 event in Dublin. We propose using that session to agree that the DPDK project will move to the Linux Foundation, and then to move on to discussing the specifics. Things that we'll need to consider include:
- Whether DPDK moves to the Linux Foundation as an independent project or as part of a larger project like FD.io.
- Creation of a project charter similar to those created for FD.io (https://fd.io/governance/technical-community-charter) and Open vSwitch (see http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160619/5a2df53e/attachment-0001.pdf).
- Agreement on budget, membership levels etc. A draft budget was created by the LF during previous discussions (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256), but it is possible to adopt an even more lightweight model.

We could look at alternatives to the Linux Foundation, but a) we've been talking to the LF for over a year now, and b) the preponderance of networking projects in LF, like ODL, FD.io, and OVS, makes it a natural destination for DPDK.

As highlighted in previous discussions on this topic, it's important to stress that the intent is not to make significant changes to the technical governance and decision making of the project. The project has a strong set of maintainers and a Technical Board in place already. What's required is to supplement that with an open governance structure taking advantage of the services offered by the Linux Foundation.

The purpose of this email is to outline what we want to achieve during that discussion session in Dublin, and to allow people to consider the issue and prepare in advance. If people want to comment via email on the mailing list, that's obviously fine, but we believe that an open and frank discussion when people meet in person in Dublin is the best way to progress this.


For reference, below is a brief history of the previous discussions on this topic:

September 2015:
- A DPDK community call was held to discuss project growth and possible improvements. This was the first public discussion on possible governance changes. The agreed next step was to discuss this in more detail at the 2015 DPDK Summit Userspace event Dublin. Minutes of the call are at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-September/024120.html.

October 2015:
- An open discussion session on project governance was held at the 2015 DPDK Summit Userspace event. For technical governance, we agreed to investigate creating a technical steering committee. For non-technical governance (including things like event planning, legal and trademark issues, hosting of the website etc.), we agreed to work with the Linux Foundation on a proposal for a lightweight governance model for DPDK. Minutes of the discussion are at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/024825.html.

- The proposal for a technical steering committee was subsequently discussed on the mailing list (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026598.html) and agreed, leading to the creation of the DPDK Technical Board (http://dpdk.org/dev#board).

December 2015:
- A community call was held to discuss migration to the Linux Foundation. Mike Dolan (VP of Strategic Programs at The Linux Foundation) gave an overview of the LF and the services they can provide. We agreed to form a small sub-team (Dave Neary, Thomas Monjalon, Stephen Hemminger, Tim O'Driscoll) to work with the LF on a more detailed proposal. Minutes of the call are at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030532.html.

February 2016:
- A community call was held to discuss the LF budget proposal (see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256). We agreed to discuss this further on the dev mailing list due to limited attendance on the call. Minutes of the call are at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/032720.html.

- A request was made on the dev and announce mailing lists too determine who supported the proposal to move to the Linux Foundation (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033192.html). There was public support from Intel (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033297.html) and Brocade (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033359.html). 6WIND requested postponing the move for a few months (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033299.html).

- The Fast Data (FD.io) project was established under the Linux Foundation (https://fd.io/news/announcement/2016/02/linux-foundation-forms-open-source-effort-advance-io-services).

June 2016:
- The Open vSwitch project proposed moving to the Linux Foundation (http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-June/021761.html).

August 2016:
- The Open vSwitch project moved to the Linux Foundation (https://www.linuxfoundation.org/announcements/open-vswitch-joins-linux-foundation-open-networking-ecosystem).

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation
@ 2016-10-12  5:44 qin.chunhua
  2016-10-12  7:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 24+ messages in thread
From: qin.chunhua @ 2016-10-12  5:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev, users, tim.odriscoll

ZTE is supportive of improving the DPDK project governance including 
moving the project to the Linux Foundation. 
DPDK has been used in lots of ZTE's equipments and solutions  such as 
BBU,RNC,EPC,vEPC,vBRAS,vCPE,vRouter,vSwitch,and so on for many years. 
We have also done some optimization in DPDK. If  the DPDK  project 
governance moves to the Linux Foundation,we think this will promote ZTE 
and other companies to contribute in DPDK. 
 
Thanks
Chunhua
 
-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of O'Driscoll, Tim
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 4:33 PM
To: dev@dpdk.org; users@dpdk.org
Subject: [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation
 
This email is being sent on behalf of: Cavium, Cisco, Intel, NXP & Red 
Hat.
 
 
Since its creation as an open source project in 2013, DPDK has grown 
significantly. The number of DPDK users, contributors, commercial products 
that use DPDK and open source projects that depend on it have all 
increased consistently over that time. DPDK is now a key ingredient in 
networking and NFV, and we need to ensure that the project structure and 
governance are appropriate for such a critical project, and that they 
facilitate the project's continued growth.
 
For over a year now we've been discussing moving DPDK to the Linux 
Foundation. We believe it's now time to conclude that discussion and make 
the move. The benefits of doing this would include:
- The infrastructure for a project like DPDK should not be owned and 
controlled by any single company.
- Remove any remaining perception that DPDK is not truly open.
- Allow the project to avail of the infrastructure and services provided 
by the Linux Foundation. These include things like: Ability to host 
infrastructure for integration and testing (the FD.io CSIT lab is an 
example of this - see https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/CSIT_LF_testbed); 
Support for legal issues including trademarks and branding, and the 
ability to sign agreements on behalf of the project; Ability to pool 
resources for events and brand promotion; Safe haven for community IP 
resources.
 
We don't propose to debate the details here. Instead, an open discussion 
session on DPDK Project Growth has been included in the agenda for the 
DPDK Summit Userspace 2016 event in Dublin. We propose using that session 
to agree that the DPDK project will move to the Linux Foundation, and then 
to move on to discussing the specifics. Things that we'll need to consider 
include:
- Whether DPDK moves to the Linux Foundation as an independent project or 
as part of a larger project like FD.io.
- Creation of a project charter similar to those created for FD.io (
https://fd.io/governance/technical-community-charter) and Open vSwitch 
(see 
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160619/5a2df53e/attachment-0001.pdf
).
- Agreement on budget, membership levels etc. A draft budget was created 
by the LF during previous discussions (
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256
), but it is possible to adopt an even more lightweight model.
 
We could look at alternatives to the Linux Foundation, but a) we've been 
talking to the LF for over a year now, and b) the preponderance of 
networking projects in LF, like ODL, FD.io, and OVS, makes it a natural 
destination for DPDK.
 
As highlighted in previous discussions on this topic, it's important to 
stress that the intent is not to make significant changes to the technical 
governance and decision making of the project. The project has a strong 
set of maintainers and a Technical Board in place already. What's required 
is to supplement that with an open governance structure taking advantage 
of the services offered by the Linux Foundation.
 
The purpose of this email is to outline what we want to achieve during 
that discussion session in Dublin, and to allow people to consider the 
issue and prepare in advance. If people want to comment via email on the 
mailing list, that's obviously fine, but we believe that an open and frank 
discussion when people meet in person in Dublin is the best way to 
progress this.
 
 
For reference, below is a brief history of the previous discussions on 
this topic:
 
September 2015:
- A DPDK community call was held to discuss project growth and possible 
improvements. This was the first public discussion on possible governance 
changes. The agreed next step was to discuss this in more detail at the 
2015 DPDK Summit Userspace event Dublin. Minutes of the call are at: 
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-September/024120.html.
 
October 2015:
- An open discussion session on project governance was held at the 2015 
DPDK Summit Userspace event. For technical governance, we agreed to 
investigate creating a technical steering committee. For non-technical 
governance (including things like event planning, legal and trademark 
issues, hosting of the website etc.), we agreed to work with the Linux 
Foundation on a proposal for a lightweight governance model for DPDK. 
Minutes of the discussion are at: 
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/024825.html.
 
- The proposal for a technical steering committee was subsequently 
discussed on the mailing list (
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026598.html) and agreed, 
leading to the creation of the DPDK Technical Board (
http://dpdk.org/dev#board).
 
December 2015:
- A community call was held to discuss migration to the Linux Foundation. 
Mike Dolan (VP of Strategic Programs at The Linux Foundation) gave an 
overview of the LF and the services they can provide. We agreed to form a 
small sub-team (Dave Neary, Thomas Monjalon, Stephen Hemminger, Tim 
O'Driscoll) to work with the LF on a more detailed proposal. Minutes of 
the call are at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030532.html
.
 
February 2016:
- A community call was held to discuss the LF budget proposal (see 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256
). We agreed to discuss this further on the dev mailing list due to 
limited attendance on the call. Minutes of the call are at: 
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/032720.html.
 
- A request was made on the dev and announce mailing lists too determine 
who supported the proposal to move to the Linux Foundation (
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033192.html). There was 
public support from Intel (
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033297.html) and Brocade (
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033359.html). 6WIND 
requested postponing the move for a few months (
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033299.html).
 
- The Fast Data (FD.io) project was established under the Linux Foundation 
(
https://fd.io/news/announcement/2016/02/linux-foundation-forms-open-source-effort-advance-io-services
).
 
June 2016:
- The Open vSwitch project proposed moving to the Linux Foundation (
http://openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-June/021761.html).
 
August 2016:
- The Open vSwitch project moved to the Linux Foundation (
https://www.linuxfoundation.org/announcements/open-vswitch-joins-linux-foundation-open-networking-ecosystem
).
 
From aber@semihalf.com  Wed Oct 12 09:37:11 2016
Return-Path: <aber@semihalf.com>
Received: from mail-it0-f46.google.com (mail-it0-f46.google.com
 [209.85.214.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D07F6CC1
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:37:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it0-f46.google.com with SMTP id e203so79210633itc.0
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:37:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=semihalf-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc; bh=7iVqFqj4agXn/Dbx41UxheEAXzSOExMxP/vRRHJySEs=;
 b=tWt8X3bIzpEqeuGU1SXAyEHe2AVfbt7+W2tzUQSrw0ZdvH08ARjIbcycLqJWxzdAdD
 4rLwOQuUiqtJO2go+oeWmlb/HnxODm5U7ZwuQO1Z1ryKY7oVrXrHB4qQNAvS40HVgX/P
 Lns8ywZc4lRVBWmWtPU6MSv+zh4hSW80C/GsVXACLHVhINOsqIwWv5RB1o2yTGtqjHtw
 Dkj1MLlJxMUHiPhMOqFsj5UjSb/nrCCdDPpCMVMXfLAFvykhliT5415sHSlrXasQrN3D
 VKsGXn7dVxZt/vJlbH1S4bpVo/dHTMuYyl0Gf7lpg14rMq5Z7ujzkGM93abEqX3WoB+T
 gzfQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=7iVqFqj4agXn/Dbx41UxheEAXzSOExMxP/vRRHJySEs=;
 b=hxx6GtedQMwGSLwGXmUJYc5TnXagl/ghsJw744yd4P5YvRz5yxHcKh9c9CMnIXyQea
 i3rPeW4YAKnFv0Lq/Fnq1Vz5c5/5UhfuYtq3xpKYCKpyIour5jWG+wOKxBwbwIrG+KA8
 5PASA3QxqeM/ifOU9mjb+MCVaqv5ThnR9JpVEhixr0EfkhHHmuiVmqWDB8yNdywy0eoD
 EF4dxQJ7vFHM9fjhqa9OerTRp59XFa0ZdnqBkjzBIys0WSAzW8rI/+h2GzeU0zczZT8c
 Yf8J41qzVbtJYPhvjMgYRMU9Na2njszqjLP/lhgEGxA/KNYf/Uqw0LTCP4iL7Ac8r6zX
 gn1Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RkYvFj14PBzwIGJUCPtFjXux2tOQ1AblbD02FL4cpDFE9t9/OPWKs1J88fCFnsWBG+fFxACeIp5Q22AdA==
X-Received: by 10.36.53.130 with SMTP id k124mr1270373ita.38.1476257830164;
 Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.79.117.79 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAFOf+QWYzdqgnoM5RZ7_y+ZOHTrwh5SqcrfpdXQYmffZWNApNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFOf+QWYzdqgnoM5RZ7_y+ZOHTrwh5SqcrfpdXQYmffZWNApNw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andriy Berestovskyy <aber@semihalf.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:36:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOysbxpmme2xHxi5SVUi1ZO3KDz+jWvsu_7b_AmMmXNHrkRO3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aniraj Kesavan <anirajkesavan@gmail.com>
Cc: users <users@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Need help understanding rte_eth_dev_count
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:37:12 -0000

Hey,
In 16.07 the PMDs drivers get register using the PMD_REGISTER_DRIVER():
http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_dev.h?id=v16.07#n187

The macro uses constructor attribute, so the drivers get registered
during the application startup, prior the main() function.


Regarding the configuration, try to reproduce the steps listed in the
documentation:
http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/i40e.html

Andriy


On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Aniraj Kesavan <anirajkesavan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm very new to dpdk and I'm trying to set it up on a cluster with the
> following configuration:
> DPDK - 16.07
> Intel X710 2x10G Nics
> Ubuntu 15.04
>
> I could compile it, but when running sample applications such as
> skeleton/basicfwd and testpmd, it fails saying the ports aren't detected.
>
> I have done the following:
> enabled 1G huge pages and mounted them under /dev/hugepages
> ran dpdk-devbind.py on the interfaces after which the status shows:
>
> Network devices using DPDK-compatible driver
> ============================================
> 0000:04:00.0 'Ethernet Controller X710 for 10GbE SFP+' drv=igb_uio unused=
> 0000:04:00.1 'Ethernet Controller X710 for 10GbE SFP+' drv=igb_uio unused=
>
> While running gdb over the basicfwd application (run as sudo as it seemed
> like a requirement), it seems like rte_eth_dev_count is returning 0. Even
> the testpmd application is reporting no ports available. I have tried the
> portmask option and tried to pass the interfaces as -w arguments too.
>
> When I looked at rte_eth_dev_count, it's returning an unsigned static int
> that is only updated by rte_eth_dev_allocate. Following the breadcrumbs, it
> seemed like someone needed to invoke rte_eth_dev_register. I didn't see
> that being called in the basicfwd example's codepath.
>
> Can anyone tell me what usually causes rte_eth_dev_register to run and
> update the port number? Or is there anything I might have missed in the
> configuration that's causing the device to not show up when the library is
> looking for it.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Aniraj
>
>
>
> --
> Aniraj Kesavan
>
> MS CS '15-'17,
> University Of Utah
> CS '08-'12,
> Govt. Model Engineering College
> alternate e-mail:anirajkalathel@gmail.com
> http://www.cs.utah.edu/~aniraj/



-- 
Andriy Berestovskyy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 24+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-10-22 19:27 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-10-10  8:33 [dpdk-users] Project Governance and Linux Foundation O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-17 10:23 ` Hobywan Kenoby
2016-10-17 11:52   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-17 12:40     ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-17 14:40       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-18 13:22         ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-17 21:23     ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] " Dave Neary
2016-10-18 11:34       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-18 13:27         ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-18 16:26           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-19  8:04             ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-19  8:40               ` Dave Neary
2016-10-19  9:56                 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-19  9:09               ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-18  4:16 ` Liu Yuan
2016-10-18 10:29   ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] How to printout PMD logs to console yingzhi
2016-10-18 10:58     ` Kavanagh, Mark B
2016-10-18 12:51   ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-21 14:00 ` Dave Neary
2016-10-21 17:20   ` Wiles, Keith
2016-10-22 19:27   ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-12  5:44 qin.chunhua
2016-10-12  7:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-13  6:10   ` Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).