On 10/01/2015 01:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 01:25:17PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >> Why use a VF on a non-virtualized system? > 1. So a userspace bug does not destroy your hardware > (PFs generally assume trusted non-buggy drivers, VFs > generally don't).
People who use dpdk trust their drivers (those drivers are the reason for the system to exist in the first place). > 2. So you can use a PF or another VF for regular networking. This is valid, but usually those systems have a separate management network. Unfortunately VFs limit the number of queues you can expose, making them less performant than PFs. The "bifurcated drivers" were meant as a way of enabling this functionality without resorting to VFs, but it seems they are stalled. > 3. So you can manage this system, to some level. > Again existing practice doesn't follow this.
