On 2/3/2021 7:48 AM, Jiawen Wu wrote:
On February 3, 2021 2:08 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 1/22/2021 9:47 AM, Jiawen Wu wrote:
This patch adds txgbevf PMD as a part of txgbe PMD.
Jiawen Wu (20):
net/txgbe: add ethdev probe and remove for VF device
net/txgbe: add base code for VF driver
net/txgbe: support add and remove VF device MAC address
net/txgbe: get VF device information
net/txgbe: add interrupt operation for VF device
net/txgbe: get link status of VF device
net/txgbe: add Rx and Tx unit init for VF device
net/txgbe: add VF device stats and xstats get operation
net/txgbe: add VLAN handle support to VF driver
net/txgbe: add RSS support for VF device
net/txgbe: add VF device promiscuous and allmulticast mode
net/txgbe: support multicast MAC filter for VF driver
net/txgbe: support to update MTU on VF device
net/txgbe: support register dump on VF device
net/txgbe: start and stop VF device
net/txgbe: add some supports as PF driver implemented
net/txgbe: support VF representor
net/txgbe: hardware support for VF representor
net/txgbe: support VLAN filter for VF representor
doc: update release note for txgbe
Hi Jiawen,
I put some comments on some patches, can you please send a new version
with updates?
And I want to note that it is specially hard to review this PMD because it is
clone of complete and complex ixgbe driver.
So most of the code is already ready, we are tying to structure it logically for
upstreaming it but it is not possible to review the details of this much
feature in
this short time.
For those feature we are relying on the Wangxun to test all these features, and
to confirm this, can it be possible for Wangxun to send some test results for
this release?
Hi Ferruh,
Should I provide test results of PF part applied to the main repo, and VF part
with
some modifications? I mean, the latest version that I format the patches.
Hi Jiawen,
Sorry for the delay, I wasn't sure how to put this, there is no official defined
process around it for now.
Testing reports can help on both:
1) A release with a new PMD can put some proof that new PMD is working as
expected.
2) Gives some confidence for new patches to be merged.
Similar to those reports:
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/84436/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/84500/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/84517/
Those reports show the NICs supported platforms. All features in dts report
don't
to be needed, do they?
This is to cover the case 1) above, as you said this is to document the
platform/NIC tested for that release.
Also quick test results for the -rc2 & -rc3 can be very helpful, if you can
provide,
like:
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/c2bd98a6da8d4955b19b8838c9bf6...@intel.com/#
t
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/92ce632a-dc21-f50c-d4d6-85e7961b6...@linux.vne
t.ibm.com/#t
And this is for 2) above, it can have more details on the features tested, so it
gives confidence and gives chance to detect and fix defect for the release.
