Hi Vincent,
> -----Original Message----- > From: Vincent JARDIN [mailto:vincent.jar...@6wind.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 9:14 PM > To: Yigit, Ferruh; Zhang, Helin; Lu, Wenzhuo; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: 'JOSHI, KAUSTUBH'; 'DANIELS, EDWARD'; 'ZELEZNIAK, ALEX' > 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. We're not sure if we want to change and maintain a totally new DPDK PF either. So, we only change PMD code and not expose it to abstraction layer. It can only be used by some users who have the needs. It's experimental and comes from the users' requirement. If it's good enough and accepted by other NICs, we can expose it. If it's not good, it still can be a choice before Linux kernel provides.
