From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] lib/librte_ether: defind RX/TX lock mode Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:12:27 -0700 Message-ID: <20160610111227.4d9828f6@xeon-e3> References: <1465191653-28408-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <1465191653-28408-3-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com> <20160607191553.10993efe@xeon-e3> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC090903483A7F@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Tao, Zhe" To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f182.google.com (mail-pf0-f182.google.com [209.85.192.182]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E0BE28FD for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 20:13:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf0-f182.google.com with SMTP id t190so25493499pfb.3 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:13:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC090903483A7F@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> 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 Wed, 8 Jun 2016 07:34:43 +0000 "Lu, Wenzhuo" wrote: > > > > The fact that it requires lots more locking inside each device driver implies to me > > this is not correct way to architect this. > It's a good question. This patch set doesn't follow the regular assumption of DPDK. > But it's a requirement we've got from some customers. The users want the driver does as much as it can. The best is the link state change is transparent to the users. > The patch set tries to provide another choice if the users don't want to stop their rx/tx to handle the reset event. Then bring those uses to the development world (on users mailing list) and lets start the discussion there. The requirements creeping in through the backdoor also worries me.