From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen-OTpzqLSitTUnbdJkjeBofR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC] dpif-netdev: Add support Intel
 DPDK based ports.
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:42:18 -0800
Message-ID: <20140129104218.48c9a1a0@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
References: <1390873715-26714-1-git-send-email-pshelar@nicira.com>
 <52E7D13B.9020404@redhat.com>
 <CALnjE+rP29s8mkiKPtppt-a8jMn-B2qS7+re2ZBd8bK46ozUPA@mail.gmail.com>
 <52E8B88A.1070104@redhat.com> <52E8D772.9070302@6wind.com>
 <52E8E2AB.1080600@redhat.com> <52E92DA6.9070704@6wind.com>
 <52E936D9.4010207@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev-yBygre7rU0TnMu66kgdUjQ@public.gmane.org" <dev-yBygre7rU0TnMu66kgdUjQ@public.gmane.org>, dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org,
 Gerald Rogers <gerald.rogers-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, dpdk-ovs-y27Ovi1pjclAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
To: Thomas Graf <tgraf-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <52E936D9.4010207-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org>

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:14:01 +0100
Thomas Graf <tgraf-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On 01/29/2014 05:34 PM, Vincent JARDIN wrote:
> > Thomas,
> >
> > First and easy answer: it is open source, so anyone can recompile. So,
> > what's the issue?
> 
> I'm talking from a pure distribution perspective here: Requiring to
> recompile all DPDK based applications to distribute a bugfix or to
> add support for a new PMD is not ideal.
> 
> So ideally OVS would have the possibility to link against the shared
> library long term.
> 
> > I get lost: do you mean ABI + API toward the PMDs or towards the
> > applications using the librte ?
> 
> Towards the PMDs is more straight forward at first so it seems logical
> to focus on that first.
> 
> A stable API and ABI for librte seems required as well long term as
> DPDK does offer shared libraries but I realize that this is a stretch
> goal in the initial phase.

I would hate to see the API/ABI nailed down. We have lots of bug fixes
and new drivers that are ready to contribute, but most of them have some
change to existing ABI.