On 12/16/2016 12:37 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:22:08AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 09:22:07 -0800, Stephen Hemminger >> <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote: >>> On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 11:09:12 -0500 >>> Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 02:46:39PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote: >>>>> Add a new macro RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP() that allows a driver >>>>> to declare the list of kernel modules required to run properly. >>>>> >>>>> Today, most PCI drivers require uio/vfio. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.m...@6wind.com> >>>>> Acked-by: Fiona Trahe <fiona.tr...@intel.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> v2 -> v3: >>>>> - fix kmods deps advertised by mellanox drivers as pointed out >>>>> by Adrien >>>>> >>>>> v1 -> >>>>> v2: >>>>> >>>>> - do not advertise uio_pci_generic for vf drivers >>>>> - rebase on top of head: use new driver names and prefix >>>>> macro with >>>>> RTE_ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> rfc -> v1: >>>>> - the kmod information can be per-device using a modalias-like >>>>> pattern >>>>> - change syntax to use '&' and '|' instead of ',' and ':' >>>>> - remove useless prerequisites in kmod lis: no need to >>>>> specify both uio and uio_pci_generic, only the latter is >>>>> required >>>>> - update kmod list in szedata2 driver >>>>> - remove kmod list in qat driver: it requires more than just >>>>> loading a kmod, which is described in documentation >>>>> >>>>> buildtools/pmdinfogen/pmdinfogen.c | 1 + >>>>> buildtools/pmdinfogen/pmdinfogen.h | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x_ethdev.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/cxgbe/cxgbe_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/e1000/em_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/enic/enic_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/mlx4/mlx4.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/qede/qede_ethdev.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/szedata2/rte_eth_szedata2.c | 2 ++ >>>>> drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> drivers/net/vmxnet3/vmxnet3_ethdev.c | 1 + >>>>> lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_dev.h | 25 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++ tools/dpdk-pmdinfo.py >>>>> | 5 ++++- 23 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>> Its odd that all devices, regardless of vendor should depend on the >>>> igb_uio module. It seems to me that depending on uio_pci_generic >>>> or vfio is sufficient. >> >> igb_uio is the historical uio module of dpdk. Although it is called >> igb_uio, it is not specific to Intel drivers. >> >> Most drivers declare "igb_uio | uio_pci_generic | vfio", which means >> that any of the 3 kernel modules can be used. >> >> I think there are some cases where people will prefer using igb_uio, >> for instance to use a vf pmd in a vm where there is no iommu, >> and where the kernel vfio module does not support the no-iommu mode. >> >> >>> >>> Yes it seems just a special case extension for Mellanox drivers. >> >> Kmod deps are different whether it's a vf driver or not. >> Mellanox drivers are not the only drivers that do not require uio, >> there is also szedata2. >> >> Is it an argument for not including this patch? >> > Speaking only for myself, I'm not suggesting the patch not be included, only > questioning the need to list igb_uio as an optional dependency. From what I > understand uio_pci_generic is equaly capable of being used in a vf as igb_uio, > and so it seems like its sufficient to list in the deps alone, or am I missing > something? > > Additionally, in regards to the comment about rebasing on net-next here, I > don't > think thats needed. This patch is built such that you will be able to apply > this tag to additional drivers later, as they get merged into thomas's tree, > you > don't need to get them all in one shot.
Right, more drivers can be added later. But also I don't see any problem if this patch rebased on next-net and be a more complete patch. That is why it was a question to the author. > More to the point, there are crypto > drivers that may make use of this module dependency tag, and those are also > missing. I would suggest taking the patch based on it current state (once the > above igb_uio issue is settled), and then adding the tag to new drivers in > subsequent releases as they get merged. > > Neil > >> >> Regards, >> Olivier >>
