> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 11:41 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [dpdk-dev] KNI broken again with 4.9 kernel > > /build/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/igb_main.c:2317:21: error: > initialization from incompatible pointer type [-Werror=incompatible- > pointer-types] > .ndo_set_vf_vlan = igb_ndo_set_vf_vlan, > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > I am sure Ferruh Yigit will fix it. > > Which raises a couple of questions: > 1. Why is DPDK still keeping KNI support for Intel specific ethtool > functionality. > This always breaks, is code bloat, and means a 3rd copy of base code > (Linux, DPDK PMD, + KNI) > > 2. Why is KNI not upstream? > If not acceptable due to security or supportablity then why does it > still exist? > > 3. If not upstream, then maintainer should track upstream kernel changes > and fix DPDK before > kernel is released. The ABI is normally set early in the rc cycle > weeks before release.
Hi Stephen, On point 2: The feedback we have always received is that the KNI code isn't upstreamable. Do you think there is an upstream path? > If not acceptable due to security or supportablity then why does it > still exist? The most commonly expressed reason when we have asked this question in the past (and we did again at Userspace a few months ago) is that the people who use it want the performance. On point 3: We do have an internal continuous integration system that runs nightly compiles of DPDK against the latest kernel and flags any issues. John
