[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] Use common Linux tools to control DPDK ports
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Tue Mar 15 01:00:43 CET 2016
On 3/14/2016 5:40 PM, Jay Rolette wrote:
> Is there some technical reason or is it just the push-back you are
> getting from some of the maintainers?
>
The majority of the discussion on the list was based on not having
kernel modules, which cloud the desired technical discussion.
As a result of the opposition, we will give a try to upstreaming and I
will be able to use some of my time to work on this.
If KCP can be upstreamed, this is good for everybody, if not I hope we
can discuss again in community the future of the feature.
And during this process, userspace counterpart in DPDK will be missing,
and kernel part will be in a form of patch for head of latest kernel, so
not sure how community will be able to test this.
> I chimed in on one of the other threads already, but I'm extremely
> disappointed that usability and serviceability improvements to existing
> DPDK capabilities (KNI) are getting blocked like this.
>
> For companies building network appliances based on DPDK, having a kernel
> module that isn't in the tree just isn't that big of a deal. Long term
> goals for getting this upstream are great, but why not take advantage of
> incremental improvements in the meantime?
>
> Jay
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com
> <mailto:ferruh.yigit at intel.com>> wrote:
>
> On 3/9/2016 11:41 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > This patch sent to keep record of latest status of the work.
> >
> >
> > This work is to make DPDK ports more visible and to enable using common
> > Linux tools to configure DPDK ports.
> >
> > Patch is based on KNI but contains only control functionality of it,
> > also this patch does not include any Linux kernel network driver as
> > part of it.
> >
> > Basically with the help of a kernel module (KCP), virtual Linux network
> > interfaces named as "dpdk$" are created per DPDK port, control messages
> > sent to these virtual interfaces are forwarded to DPDK, and response
> > sent back to Linux application.
> >
> > Virtual interfaces created when DPDK application started and destroyed
> > automatically when DPDK application terminated.
> >
> > Communication between kernel-space and DPDK done using netlink socket.
> >
> > In long term this patch intends to replace the KNI and KNI will be
> > depreciated.
> >
>
> Self-NACK: Will work on netdev to upstream this.
>
>
More information about the dev
mailing list