Hi Vincent, > -----Original Message----- > From: Vincent JARDIN [mailto:vincent.jar...@6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 5:14 PM > To: Lu, Wenzhuo; Stephen Hemminger > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/8] QoS features on i40e - Linux kernel > divergence > > Le 24/02/2017 à 08:23, Lu, Wenzhuo a écrit : > >> It is good to allow setting QoS on device, but it looks like this is > >> a device specific API, not a generic PMD function. I don't think any > >> feature in DPDK should be hardcoded to one device type. > > Yes, they're private APIs. > > Normally we want to support kernel PF + dpdk VF. As there's no PF - VF > interface defined for QoS, These features cannot be implemented on VF now. > > Have to put them on PF, and let PF play as a controller. > > There's discussion about if we should rich PF host features. So, I put these > functions to rte_pmd_i40e.h to show they're experimental and temporary > features. > > > > There's another thread started by Cristian for a generic QoS solution. > > After it's > accepted and the PF-VF interfaces are defined by kernel driver. We can use a > generic solution to replace this one. > > Same, DPDK continues to diverge from the Linux kernel for PF capabilities. > Intel > did commit previously that you'll do some works for proper PF support into the > kernel to avoid it. It is not happening. So, I would rather keep nack'ing such > series unless: > - either it is under experimental compilation option Yes, they're experimental. I put the functions in the rte_pmd_i40e.h. All the functions in this file are announced experimental.
> - either it is showing up into the kernel We're discussing this internally in parallel. > > Best regards, > Vincent
