From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] net/softnic: sw fall-back for traffic management Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 01:48:29 +0200 Message-ID: <2992148.u9bnyqStKL@xps> References: <20170526181149.44085-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> <1855073.SEfz2U5OaA@xps> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891267BA66BEB@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Singh, Jasvinder" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" , "Jerin.JacobKollanukkaran@cavium.com" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , techboard@dpdk.org To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891267BA66BEB@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 08/06/2017 18:43, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > ... > > > > I'm sure I'm missing something. > > In my understanding, we do not need to change the ops: > > - if the device offers the capability, let's call the ops > > - else call the software fallback function > > > > What you might be missing is the observation that the approach you're describing requires changing each and every PMD. The changes are also intrusive: need to change the ops that need the SW fall-back patching, also need to change the private data of each PMD (as assigned to the opaque dev->data->dev_private) to add the context data needed by the patched ops. Therefore, this approach is a no-go. > > We are looking for a generic approach that can gracefully and transparently work with any PMD. Nobody is participating in this discussion. Can we discuss how to proceed in the technical board meeting?