On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 20:41:27 +0000 "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wi...@intel.com> wrote:
> Being able to add features without having to change DPDK maybe a strong > feature for companies that have special needs for its application. They just > need to add a rte_eth_capability enum in a range that they want to control > (which does not mean they need to change the above structure) and they can > provide private features to the application especially if they are very > specific features to some HW. I do not like private features, but I also do > not want to stick just any old API in DPDK for any given special feature. I understand why you make that argument, but in practice it doesn't work that way. When new features get added to DPDK, then the application must request those features through configration and other API's. Therefore building everything into eth_dev doesn't seem to be helpful.
