I agree.
It is worth discussing in VPP community call if VPP should access the
DPDK internal APIs - it surely leaves us more flexibility with the price
of possible more maintenance effort.
- BTW was there a meeting on this Tuesday? I joined 4 minutes late but
nobody was there.
Apart from that I believe the patch is in relatively good shape, surely
lacked testing though.
As of continuous build/sanity between VPP and DPDK main branch - the way
DPDK function/perf testing the patches now are RC-based, there are build
tests carried out per-patch based, and there is a crypto unit test
running nightly with only SW crypto PMDs (@Kai is it still running?).
If VPP does the sanity check against DPDK main branch - I personally
believe VPP may catch some potential DPDK bugs earlier than DPDK
validation team.
Hence I believe it is a very good idea as a cooperation between two
projects. This in my opinion also means we need DPDK tech board members
attending regular meeting with us in case some problems have been
catched early.
Regards,
Fan
On 1/11/2023 10:29 PM, Andrew Yourtchenko wrote:
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 (#22454): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/22454
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]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
