On 12/9/2020 7:05 PM, Andrew Boyer wrote:
On Dec 9, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
On 12/9/2020 4:24 PM, Andrew Boyer wrote:
On Dec 9, 2020, at 10:24 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com
<mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com>> wrote:
On 12/9/2020 2:36 PM, Andrew Boyer wrote:
Please respond to my questions this time. I have ~70 more patches to post by
December 20.
On Dec 9, 2020, at 7:03 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com
<mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com> <mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com
<mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com>>> wrote:
On 12/4/2020 8:16 PM, Andrew Boyer wrote:
The UNMAINTAINED flag will be removed in a future patch.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Boyer <abo...@pensando.io <mailto:abo...@pensando.io>
<mailto:abo...@pensando.io <mailto:abo...@pensando.io>>>
---
MAINTAINERS | 3 ++-
doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini | 2 ++
doc/guides/nics/ionic.rst | 13 +++++++------
3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
index eafe9f8c4..6534983c1 100644
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@ -841,7 +841,8 @@ F: drivers/net/pfe/
F: doc/guides/nics/features/pfe.ini
Pensando ionic - UNMAINTAINED
-M: Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigli...@ntop.org <mailto:cardigli...@ntop.org>
<mailto:cardigli...@ntop.org <mailto:cardigli...@ntop.org>>>
+M: Andrew Boyer <abo...@pensando.io <mailto:abo...@pensando.io> <mailto:abo...@pensando.io
<mailto:abo...@pensando.io>>>
+M: Pensando Drivers <driv...@pensando.io <mailto:driv...@pensando.io>
<mailto:driv...@pensando.io <mailto:driv...@pensando.io>>>
Same comment from previous version, please don't add group as maintainer, only
actual people.
I responded to your original comment about this back in November. Is there an
official DPDK policy against doing this? Is it your preference? We would very
much prefer to have this in the file as a fallback. As long as there is still
at least one person listed, what is the harm?
There is no official policy against it as far as I know.
The problem with the groups is we don't know who is behind it, it blurs who is
the owner/responsible of the component. Actual people makes it clear that who
is responsible.
Why do you prefer to add a group as maintainer?
Because if I am on leave for some reason, one of the other handful of
maintainers might be able to help someone with a problem or a question.
If I am listed specifically, doesn’t that make clear “who is the
owner/responsible” for ionic PMD? What harm does having drivers@ listed do?
If you want backups, pick and list a few of those handful maintainers and add
to the list, so we can know who they are.
As already said problem is we don't know who is behind a group, if they are
reliable or not, or is there really someone or not, what happens if group
become silent?
You can cc that group in your patches, that is commonly done, so they can be
part of the development process, but the maintainers file is to define
responsible people, adding a group is hiding actual responsible people.
Fine. Perhaps you could document somewhere that this requirement exists to save
future people the trouble.
F: drivers/net/ionic/
F: doc/guides/nics/ionic.rst
F: doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini
diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini
b/doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini
index 083c7bd99..dd29dbed6 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/features/ionic.ini
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Speed capabilities = Y
Link status = Y
Link status event = Y
Queue start/stop = Y
+Lock-free Tx queue = Y
Are you sure this is supported?
Since it is not advertised as capability, I think this can't be claimed as
supported, but still even after this is added as capability, can you please
confirm your device supports multiple core enqueue to same queue without locks?
I misunderstood the meaning of this flag, will remove.
MTU update = Y
Jumbo frame = Y
Scattered Rx = Y
@@ -19,6 +20,7 @@ Unicast MAC filter = Y
RSS hash = Y
RSS key update = Y
RSS reta update = Y
+SR-IOV = Y
Can you please explain what is exactly supported? Like can DPDK drive both PF &
VF?
Yes. The PMD does not distinguish between PFs and VFs.
<...>
@@ -7,15 +7,16 @@ IONIC Driver
The ionic driver provides support for Pensando server adapters.
It currently supports the below models:
-- `Naples DSC-25 <https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples-25_ProductBrief_10-2019.pdf
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples-25_ProductBrief_10-2019.pdf>
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples-25_ProductBrief_10-2019.pdf
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples-25_ProductBrief_10-2019.pdf>>>`_
-- `Naples DSC-100 <https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples_100_ProductBrief-10-2019.pdf
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples_100_ProductBrief-10-2019.pdf>
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples_100_ProductBrief-10-2019.pdf
<https://pensando.io/assets/documents/Naples_100_ProductBrief-10-2019.pdf>>>`_
+- DSC-25 dual-port 25G Distributed Services Card
+- DSC-100 dual-port 100G Distributed Services Card
Same comment from previous version, can you provide link for these devices, it
is hard to find the devices from the main site.
And my same response from your previous comment. I do not control the website
and do not wish to put stale PDF links in this document, which will live
forever. The text includes the URL of the page containing links to the PDFs.
Why is this not acceptable?
The request is to put links to the products that you are providing the driver
for. This is to help people that are already interested your driver and reading
your driver document, to reach to the product information easily.
The request is NOT to provide pdf etc, just a reference to the product. Don't
you advertise your product in your official web site? If your product
information is not visible/hidden, why you are providing the open source
drivers for it?
Does this line in the doc not satisfy your request?
+The `Documents <https://pensando.io/documents/
<https://pensando.io/documents/>>`_ page contains Product Briefs and other product
information.
No it doesn't, it is not clear which document/product you are referring to.
Why it is hard to provide the link of products that your driver is for?
Fine. These links will become stale next time the files are updated, just like
the links in the 20.02-20.11 releases are stale.
https://pensando.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Pensando-DSC-25-Product-Brief.pdf
https://pensando.io/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Pensando-DSC-100-Product-Brief.pdf
If you are sure that they will go stale, that is also not good solution. Why
they are keep getting stale? Can't you communicate internally in your company
for permanent link?
