From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mk: Introduce NXP dpaa2 architecture based
 on armv8-a
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 21:47:41 +0530
Message-ID: <20160509161740.GA1853@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1462801702-30918-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
 <20160509090621.GA4631@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP4Qi3-Br6vX_KOYO3iA8vQDHLovH+N2xnTBTxrqY+LA6X9ntQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160509121118.GA8689@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAP4Qi3-kkrkS9zusN5hse79bprfzjbiJ=moNUxRtpL0akttdGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-by2on0072.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.72])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A180C6CBA
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  9 May 2016 18:18:05 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAP4Qi3-kkrkS9zusN5hse79bprfzjbiJ=moNUxRtpL0akttdGQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 11:22:15PM +0800, Jianbo Liu wrote:
> On 9 May 2016 at 20:11, Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 07:02:36PM +0800, Jianbo Liu wrote:
> >> On 9 May 2016 at 17:06, Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 07:18:22PM +0530, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> >> >> This patch introduces dpaa2 machine target to address difference
> >> >> in cpu parameter, number of core to 8 and no numa support
> >> >> w.r.t default armv8-a machine
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> >> >> ---

Snip

> >> >> +#
> >> >> +# Compile Environment Abstraction Layer
> >> >> +#
> >> >> +CONFIG_RTE_MAX_LCORE=8
> >> >> +CONFIG_RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES=1
> >> >> +CONFIG_RTE_EAL_IGB_UIO=n
> >> >
> >> > I think it makes sense to move this option to generic arm64 config
> >> > as upstream arm64 kernel does not have support for sysfs based PCI mmap
> >> > resource file,(/sys/bus/pci/devices/B:D:F/resource[_wc]X) need for
> >> > CONFIG_RTE_EAL_IGB_UIO to work) and use VFIO for all cases.
> >> >
> >> > Any objections?
> >> >
> >> Is there any conflict to keep both?
> >
> > I would like to avoid the case like below in dpdk.org ml.
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-January/031313.html
> >
> So no conflict to enable both.

IMO, Conflict part comes secondary, It does not even work with upstream kernel.
Why keep the broken configuration? Two main reasons I think it makes
sense to disable
- It is broken, I don't think arm64 kernel developers likes non VFIO approach
now. So mostly likely it will be broken
- Trying to avoid out of tree patches wherever is possible as
distribution folks like to work with upstream version.

> I'd rather keep as it is for armv8a defconfig, becasue it's the base,
> any change may affect existing user.
IMO, It makes sense to disable at armv8a defconfig otherwise all armv8
variants need add CONFIG_RTE_EAL_IGB_UIO=n in all the configs and its
arch specific issue.