From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: kernel binding of devices + hotplug Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:57:23 -0700 Message-ID: <20180416095723.0d7698c7@xeon-e3> References: <2407757.yEAnF6RcS7@xps> <20180413164046.GD37024@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180416083153.GA50020@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Bruce Richardson , "Burakov, Anatoly" , Thomas Monjalon , "dev@dpdk.org" , "pmatilai@redhat.com" , "david.marchand@6wind.com" , "jia.guo@intel.com" , "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" , "fbl@redhat.com" To: Matan Azrad Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f49.google.com (mail-pg0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE02AAAE for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:57:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id t12so4093673pgp.13 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:57:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:11:12 +0000 Matan Azrad wrote: > > If the device management is only managed in one place, i.e. not in DPDK, > > then there is no conflict to manage. > > I can't agree with this statement, > The essence of DPDK is to give a good alternative to managing network devices, > DPDK actually takes a lot of management area to manage by itself to do the user life better :) More is not better! DPDK is poorly integrated into Linux overall system. Doing more in DPDK makes this worse not better. Buried under this discussion is the fact that the Mellanox bifurcated driver behaves completely differently from every other driver. This makes coming to a common solution much harder. The bifurcated model has advantages and disadvantages, in this case it is a disadvantage since it is not easy to manage usage when it is a shared resource.