From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] fix RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:05:40 +0100 Message-ID: <2250582.9NrEEBnPD3@xps13> References: <1450873172-21932-1-git-send-email-reshma.pattan@intel.com> <8174506.yrx6lfkTWS@xps13> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831FFBEB1B@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "Pattan, Reshma" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77E36C300 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 16:06:57 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id g62so51925495wme.0 for ; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 07:06:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831FFBEB1B@IRSMSX109.ger.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" 2016-02-05 14:58, Pattan, Reshma: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > 2016-01-05 16:34, Reshma Pattan: > > > From: reshmapa > > > > > > Patches 1 and 2 removes RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET and > > > RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET macro usage from rte_ether and rte_cryptodev > > > libraries to allow API access to secondary process. > > > > I don't understand the use case. > > These changes were added for the use case where vdev has to be configured from secondary process. > As of now, secondary process is allowed to create vdev but not allowed to configure it. > Ex1: tcpdump feature needs these changes. As we create & configure vdev from secondary process. > Ex2: Sean Harte, initially reported this as limitation as part of his development related to containers proof-of concept. > > > What is the role of the primary process if queues are configured by the > > secondary process? > > There can be use cases where primary and secondary processes needs to configure different queues of same port or needs to configure different PCI ports. > I assume, users will be aware of PCI port & queue combinations used in primary and will not try to reconfigure them in secondary. > > > You have not answered to Michael: > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030811.html > > > > Other question first asked by Michael > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030777.html > > There are some comments asserting that it is not safe for secondary. > > And your answer was it is safe for vdev? And what about PCI devices? > > I assume, users will be aware of PCI port & queue combinations used in primary and will not try to reconfigure them in secondary. OK, thanks, good answer. Anyone against this idea?