[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 00/29] Support VFD and DPDK PF + kernel VF on i40e
vincent.jardin at 6wind.com
Tue Jan 10 14:29:55 CET 2017
Le 04/01/2017 à 22:09, Scott Daniels a écrit :
> With holidays we are a bit late with our thoughts, but would like to
> toss them into the mix.
Same, I hope I am not missing emails. I do appreciate your arguments, it
provides lot of light. See below,
> The original NAK is understandable, however having the ability to
> configure the PF via DPDK is advantageous for several reasons:
> 1) While some functions may be duplicated and/or available from the kernel
> driver, it is often not possible to introduce new kernel drivers into
> production without a large amount of additional testing of the entire
> platform which can cause a significant delay when introducing a DPDK based
> product. If the PF control is a part of the DPDK environment, then only
> the application needs to pass the operational testing before deployment; a
> much more simple task.
So we agree: you confirm that your foresee the benefits of using DPDK to
*bypass the role of the Kernel being the PF* of reference for the
> 2) If the driver changes are upstreamed into the kernel proper, the
> difficulty of operational readiness testing increases as a new kernel is
> introduced, and further undermines the ability to quickly and easily
> release a DPDK based application into production. While the application
> may eventually fall back on driver and/or kernel support, this could be
> years away.
I do agree with the benefits of the agilities and the upsides it brings.
But they are other options to get the same agility without creating a
fragmentation of PFs.
For example, you do not have to update the whole kernel, you can just
update the PF kernel module that can be upgraded with the latest needed
> 3) As DPDK is being used to configure the NIC, it just seems to make
> sense, for consistency, that the configuration capabilities should include
> the ability to configure the PF as is proposed.
From this perspective, the kernel modules are fine for the PF: most
kernels of hypervisors support it without the need to upgrade their kernels.
To summarize, I understand that you need a flexible way to upgrade PF
features without touching/changing the kernel. So let's check the kernel
module option? VFD brings some interesting capabilities, could it be a
way to push and stimulate the i40e features instead of using DPDK?
for instance could be better stimulated.
More information about the dev