On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 09:57:25AM +0000, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 14-Feb-18 12:48 AM, Zhang, Xiaohua wrote: > > Hi Yigit and Anantoly, > > I checked the nics-17.11.pdf, the following is description: > > "The Accelerated Virtual Port (AVP) device is a shared memory based device > > only available > > on virtualization platforms from Wind River Systems. The Wind River Systems > > virtualization > > platform currently uses QEMU/KVM as its hypervisor and as such provides > > support for all of > > the QEMU supported virtual and/or emulated devices (e.g., virtio, e1000, > > etc.). The platform > > offers the virtio device type as the default device when launching a > > virtual machine or creating > > a virtual machine port. The AVP device is a specialized device available to > > customers that > > require increased throughput and decreased latency to meet the demands of > > their performance > > focused applications." > > > > I am afraid just "memory_device" will have some misunderstanding. > > Could we put it as "avp device (shared memory based)"? > > > > > > Hi, > > Well, from AVP PMD documentation, it seems that AVP is classified as a NIC. > Can't we just add it to the list of NICs, even if it's not Ethernet class > 0x20xx? Pattern-matching in devbind should work either way. For example, you > can see there's "cavium_pkx" already classified as a NIC, even though its > class is 08xx, not 02xx. So why not this one? >
Definite +1. It's used for packet IO into a vm, like virtio, and it's driver is in drivers/net. "If it looks like a NIC, and quacks like a NIC, then it probably is a NIC". [Alternatively if it looks and quacks like a duck, I'm not sure what it's doing in DPDK!] /Bruce
