From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: Ethtool support in DPDK pmd Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:31:00 -0700 Message-ID: <20140602173100.4168307c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <5D695A7F6F10504DBD9B9187395A21797D0CF42B@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> <20140602203735.GL8384@x220.localdomain> <538CEE10.4000900@6wind.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org, hyunseok-EkmVulN54Sk@public.gmane.org To: Vincent JARDIN Return-path: In-Reply-To: <538CEE10.4000900-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 23:35:12 +0200 Vincent JARDIN wrote: > On 02/06/2014 22:37, Chris Wright wrote: > > If drivers stayed in kernel and kernel drivers exposed a mechansim for > > registering application dma buffers for dpdk apps, then ethtool would > > simply work as-is. > > Yes, that's the right way to go. Currently, the kernel does not provide > a generic framework for that and I am not aware of any projects in order > to define it. Could it be something to discuss on netdev@? > > So, as a workaround, some proprietary solutions get implemented in order > to get ethtool running with any DPDK PMD. > > Best regards, > Vincent Ethtool has a number of problems. You can implement for KNI or TUN type devices, but it really doesn't make sense for a generic type driver. Also, it tends to get used for device specific things.