Hi Bruce,
>> > However, even with that, I would suggest that any limit should be possible
>> > to
>> override. It's entirely possible that someone max actually want to reserve
>> the
>> full number of VFs, either because they don't want to use the NIC on the
>> host at
>> all, or because they
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Wright [mailto:chrisw at redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 11:14 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce
> Cc: Chris Wright; Stephen Hemminger; Thomas Monjalon; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] igb_uio: cap max VFs at 7 to reserve one for PF
>
> * Richar
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Wright [mailto:chrisw at redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 10:52 AM
> To: Richardson, Bruce; Stephen Hemminger
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH] igb_uio: cap max VFs at 7 to reserve one for PF
>
> To keep from confusing u
* Richardson, Bruce (bruce.richardson at intel.com) wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Wright [mailto:chrisw at redhat.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 11:14 AM
> > To: Richardson, Bruce
> > Cc: Chris Wright; Stephen Hemminger; Thomas Monjalon; dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re
* Richardson, Bruce (bruce.richardson at intel.com) wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chris Wright [mailto:chrisw at redhat.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 10:52 AM
> > To: Richardson, Bruce; Stephen Hemminger
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: [PATCH] ig
To keep from confusing users, cap max VFs at 7, despite PCI SR-IOV config
space showing a max of 8. This reserves a queue pair for the PF.
This issue was cited here:
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-April/001832.html
Cc: Bruce Richardson
Cc: Stephen Hemminger
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright
6 matches
Mail list logo
