From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D60245A6D for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:26:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 175F940150; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:26:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f176.google.com (mail-pf1-f176.google.com [209.85.210.176]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC1824014F for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-7198de684a7so3336981b3a.2 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:25:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1727731559; x=1728336359; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=HyyIjL29Duy4za4H3+eIAMoSiJ+WvUwkQUkrH78JUoU=; b=EMBNP5JnLdHepMCSGOQQp92ahFdgYCb//o2gd56OY4v5+LOXIGA4laIaBGsecffA4l yE01alvp6TPDXHJGAgzn6BZ5xCSLrpsIGsGjFPLvNTuVA1/MIgM9LCYW6GutctNf6r6K JVOTVNV/JeqglaFk6uenwjSd2kktgxbneMOJfkfUFRx3VmDbILTQLsLPYO6W8hto/rS5 Sg6/n4TmIVCj9KTYEKHNCqzbpeZC2gUUfmtWO8AnkTu/FrD6+3nWF5VgVhkc4my3WwlV vm1jR/IyV7tyr9tj+Uq9KuMINSeI3HWufpARDFr4C9L1wOZs6MLIJ/N8T7Z7ACmn19Qm 8e0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727731559; x=1728336359; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HyyIjL29Duy4za4H3+eIAMoSiJ+WvUwkQUkrH78JUoU=; b=lvYt6s+2ZVUVK8IUmi7z7RD9enhDCBAk3mE+qmvTMh0VBTYZ9mzn0Nk8fCJPq3QcsY SzKiZ4lm11h15FcU/MASiOU8ATDTvsOZWBnULCBgNQqEk3t5iBT9BZTPmPzLvRK8bRph OQ0A/NOBIHW0xX8udypMETGKPd+nJ0BzieS29MF2tPRyQsvYmHZ3EzV3+suHtYZ1QAS/ rPijeYf/TS+P9n1YLggP13M5r58fJyfSlSxuhY9mJppUmAuygiLfKTo7MW7UlmkX0ucV c/MSlz/Yma1MwDEQVSjCf6Cix6K8HsxVH7m5VlXDvGjwxN79VnqLLEyTopNYMK7qgMag TvSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwZ22RYCKI0gbcOegUhcsjExZ03cU2motKW6rZER7LQdK4gcVIs /cT6Q/bkZjFO+20RDjqtlnuqm0mjSZYUE4qcjTbN+HqyLMrIbvQRhtwdj47leHI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHM7nl7h9R3lxXAckCHnE95khtWYSTNht7hk+aS8WfW549TWx22pWQg7FjelUEUWanhjNeJqw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:8c2:b0:718:d573:25b9 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-71b25f6f315mr22287813b3a.16.1727731558703; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-71b2649c09csm6664289b3a.1.2024.09.30.14.25.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:25:56 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Igor Gutorov Cc: users@dpdk.org Subject: Re: Bind one port to DPDK, the other to the kernel Message-ID: <20240930142556.07a9554e@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 23:40:36 +0300 Igor Gutorov wrote: > Hi, > > I wanted to ask for a bit of clarification/guidance on binding and > unbinding network ports. > > Consider the following - a server with an Intel XXV710 NIC (i40e PMD). > This NIC has 2 ports. One port is bound to vfio-pci (no VFs are used, > if that matters) and is used by a DPDK application, the other port is > bound to the kernel i40e driver. The kernel bound port is used for > general networking (such as ssh, and so on). > > Based on the DPDK getting started guide [1], am I understanding > correctly that this is not the recommended setup? > Specifically, these parts: > > Most devices require that the hardware to be used by DPDK be > > unbound from the kernel driver it uses, and instead be bound > > to the vfio-pci kernel module before the application is run. > > > physical devices may require either all ports bound to VFIO, or > > some of them bound to VFIO while others not being bound to > > anything at all. > > If that's the case, what's the correct way to support such a > configuration? I guess, something like this? > - Bind one port to vfio-pci, used entirely by DPDK > - Bind the second port to vfio-pci > - Create a VF for the second port > - Bind that VF to the kernel i40e driver > Am I understanding this correctly? If you have access to the PF in Linux, then using a VF for the DPDK device is an option. But still vfio-pci is unlikely to allow it since maybe in same IOMMU group.