25/06/2020 02:30, Chautru, Nicolas: > > From: Thomas Monjalon : > > 02/05/2020 01:15, Chautru, Nicolas: > > > Hi Akhil, Thomas, > > > > > > Following up on that previous discussion below so that to confirm whether > > there is an available option to handle this usecase within DPDK repo. > > > > > > Basically traditional deployment for VRAN relies on BBDEV/DPDK running > > within container where the workload is processed behind BBDEV API bounded > > to a VF of the accelerator, all that is fully covered currently in 20.05. > > > Conversely an application from baremetal still has to be run at > > > initialization > > to do the required register poking to PF MMIO so that to configure the HW so > > that the VF is functional. Without this it is not possible to use the VF > > driver > > form within the container. Said otherwise the BBDEV VF PMD cannot be even > > tested with DPDK repo (only the PF PMD with the workaround discussed in > > the previous discussion). > > > That small userspace application is purely doing mmap and writing to > > register based on xml file input (relying on igb_uio bounded to PF, or other > > vanilla kernel module) and has no dependency on rest of DPDK (DPDK would > > not be installed outside of the container since no packet or wireless > > workload > > is actually run from there). > > > Is that sensible to add such a small companion application within the > > related PMD directory even if it has no dependency on DPDK libraries per se, > > only the fact that is required just to be able to use BBDEV from the VF. > > > On one hand I see reason not to do this as this is not a DPDK application > > > per > > se, but that companion HW application is still required to be able for > > anyone > > to use BBDEV driver + being within the same repo enforces that there is no > > risk of version mismatch. The other option being to put that on a separate > > repo outside of DPDK causing fragmentation of ingredients across repos. > > > > > > I wanted to check whether you had any strong opinion on this topic and > > whether a patch with such a companion simple user application may be > > approved. > > > > I feel it is best to have the required app in the PMD directory, as in > > "batteries > > included". > > > > Hi Thomas, > For such a companion application to configure the HW within the PMD directory > I want to confirm two things before pushing a patch : > - This is okay with you for it to build outside of the DPDK build flow. > Ie. Separate Makefile, not planning meson support. Again zero DPDK libraries > dependency.
I think it should be built as part of the PMD. Why not? > - This is okay with you for it to have dependency on other open-source > library to build it. Ie. we are currently linking to this > https://github.com/benhoyt/inih (BSD license) as a simple input config file > parsing. No problem with dependencies.
