Re: [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speed config API
From: Marc <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-29 12:41:13
On 29 January 2016 at 11:17, Ananyev, Konstantin < konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 9:54 AM To: Ananyev, Konstantin Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Marc Sune; Lu, Wenzhuo; Zhang, Helin; Harish Patil;Chen, Jing D; Mcnamara, Johnquoted
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/5] ethdev: redesign link speedconfig APIquoted
2016-01-29 09:47, Ananyev, Konstantin:quoted
From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]quoted
2016-01-29 09:24, Ananyev, Konstantin:quoted
Can you avoid modifications in the e1000/base code?
Yes I can. It was just to save intermediate variables and conversions. Previously u16 was used to store numeric throughput in mbps in ethdev, and passed to the inner functions in e1000/base, but it cannot accommodate 100G values, so I moved it to uint32_t. But I can do the conversion outside of e1000/base.
quoted
quoted
quoted
We do not modify (and maintain) that part on our own.quoted
Instead we take it straight from Intel ND. So if you feel like these changes are really necessary - pleasesubmit a patchquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
to ND first, and if your changes will be applied, will pick it upfrom them.quoted
quoted
quoted
I was not aware we can submit a change to ND for Intel base drivers. What is the procedure please?I meant not to the ND directly, but probably to the freebsd e1000kernel driver.quoted
quoted
As I remember, that is the closest one to what we have. From my understanding (I might be wrong here): If they will be accepted, we should see these changes In next codedrops from ND.quoted
These base drivers are used in several places. We are allowed to submit a patch in Linux or FreeBSD but not in DPDK where the base driver is verbatim?Yes, that's my understanding.quoted
We have an agreement to not touch them in DPDKYes.quoted
but I still think the ND team could consider some patches from dpdk.org.I personally think that would be a good thing, but it is up to ND guys to make such decision.
Agree, but: Besides documenting (which is necessary), why not importing the sources via a git submodule pointing to the base project where these files are obtained (e.g. in drivers/net/e1000/ext/ or even in the root folder under ext/ and making symlinks to that in e1000 driver), and just use the raw sources and headers from there? That would make it more explicit that these files should not be modified by DPDK by strictly forbidding so, and that changes should be done via the repository pointed in drivers/net/e1000/ext/, hence following that repository's workflow. marc
Konstantin