My naive impression looking at the change, seems like it’s still work in progress with several comments open. Especially with the autumn DPDK release IIRC being the “API-breaking” one, looks a bit risky to me… I think haste may get us into places we don’t wanna be in. I would vote to merge this into master post-RC1 milestone, thus giving it more time to soak, and not to put undue strain on anyone.
At the same time I would like to (again?) bring up the idea of doing some sort of continuous build/sanity between VPP and DPDK master branches - Fan, I think we discussed this once ? We could then have a change ready “just in time” in the future, potentially ? As I am not well versed with DPDK - does this idea even make sense ? --a > On 11 Jan 2023, at 16:53, Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) via lists.fd.io > <mkonstan=cisco....@lists.fd.io> wrote: > > Hi, > > On CSIT call just now Kai made us aware of issues with above (cryptodev, > sat), as captured in this patch: > > 37840: dpdk: make impact to VPP for changes in API for DPDK 22.11 | > https://gerrit.fd.io/r/c/vpp/+/37840 > > 23.02 RC1 is next week and in CSIT we start testing at RC1 milestone, so it’s > very last minute … > > Also, in the past we got burned by DPDK bump requiring bumping firmware > versions on FVL and CVL NICs, which for our performance testbed fleet is a > bit of an operation (e.g. on Arm we have to remove the NICs and put them into > Xeon machines to do firmware upgrade, unless things improved recently). > > Asking for views if we could delay dpdk ver bumping to avoid rushing it in, > especially that there are open issues? > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > -Maciek > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#22452): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/22452 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/96211041/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/leave/1480452/21656/631435203/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
