> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Vincent JARDIN > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 9:14 PM > To: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Zhang, Helin > <helin.zh...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; > dev@dpdk.org > Cc: 'JOSHI, KAUSTUBH' <kaust...@research.att.com>; 'DANIELS, EDWARD' > <dani...@research.att.com>; 'ZELEZNIAK, ALEX' <az5...@att.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 00/25] Support VFD on i40e > > Le 10/01/2017 à 22:32, Ferruh Yigit a écrit : > > What do you think to continue high level DPDK PF discussion in mail > > thread for other pathset? So that we can continue to work on this one. > > First, we need to assess or not if it makes sense to go toward Linux kernel or > DPDK based PF. If Linux kernel is used, then DPDK does not need VFD related > modifications. >
> VFD demonstrates that there are some needs of features, but it pushes the new > path of a fork of PF drivers. DPDK PF working with DPDK VF is not new scenario at all. It was already supported. This patchset just adds more features from my view. Even if DPDK PF supports Kernel VF, it is a way to make VF and PF's driver low coupling. User can define their scenario flexibly. I don't what is the reason to object that. Thanks Jingjing
