From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: BUG - KNI broken in 4.2 kernel Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 13:44:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20150828124428.GA11184@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <20150826171516.7160bcb2@urahara> <20150827104543.0138ab53@urahara> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2AEB591A for ; Fri, 28 Aug 2015 14:44:33 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150827104543.0138ab53@urahara> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:45:43AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:56:16 +0000 > "Zhang, Helin" wrote: >=20 > > Based on my experience, only one or two users asked for ethtool suppo= rt, then we have it. Before that time, we don=E2=80=99t have KNI ethtool = support. > > I did not mean who uses KNI does not care about it, I mean for those = users who don=E2=80=99t use KNI, they shouldn=E2=80=99t be bothered by th= e KNI compilation issues. That=E2=80=99s why I was thinking if we can dis= able it by default, but not remove it. > > =C2=A0 > > Regards, > > Helin >=20 > Can KNI instead use DPDK hooks to provide generic ethtool semantics. > That way it would work with all hardware. Hi Stephen, by this you mean that it's a generic library/kernel driver that acts as a= proxy to make calls into the ethdev library, rather than driver-specific calls? If so, that's= an idea that should be well worth pursuing. If it's something else you have in mi= nd, please clarify. Thanks, /Bruce