From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/9] usertools: add DPDK config lib python library Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 16:58:10 +0100 Message-ID: <46740342.DiogZ73Asx@xps> References: <2017620.fyvpj9GtK5@xps> <31bc1c07-0c41-1a53-445b-3f56302e35a9@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: "Richardson, Bruce" , "Wiles, Keith" , Stephen Hemminger , dev , "Mcnamara, John" , "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" , "Hunt, David" , "Awal, Mohammad Abdul" , "Yigit, Ferruh" To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Return-path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AED2D2BB1 for ; Fri, 16 Nov 2018 16:58:13 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <31bc1c07-0c41-1a53-445b-3f56302e35a9@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" 16/11/2018 16:43, Burakov, Anatoly: > On 16-Nov-18 2:55 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 16/11/2018 15:37, Burakov, Anatoly: > >> On 16-Nov-18 2:13 PM, Richardson, Bruce wrote: > >>> From: Wiles, Keith > >>>>> On Nov 16, 2018, at 5:49 AM, Burakov, Anatoly > >>>>> On 16-Nov-18 12:45 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > >>>>>> Anatoly Burakov wrote: > >>>>>>> This is a placeholder for Python library abstracting away many of > >>>>>>> mundane details DPDK configuration scripts have to deal with. We > >>>>>>> need __init__.py file to make the subdirectory a package so that > >>>>>>> Python scripts in usertools/ can find their dependencies. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Doing this a better than current code, but can we go farther? > >>>>>> I would like DPDK to get out of doing binds directly and switch to > >>>>>> using driverctl which also handles persistent rebind on reboot. > >>>>> > >>>>> Wasn't the objection that it's not available everywhere? (for the > >>>>> record, i have no horse in the race - i don't much care exactly how > >>>>> it's done) > >>>> > >>>> If it works on FreeBSD and Linux then I am all for it. On windows does it > >>>> support this method too? > >>> > >>> Binding and unbinding is completely different on each OS. FreeBSD has no overlap > >>> of scripts with Linux, so replacing some of our tools with driverctl won't affect > >>> that OS. > >>> > >>> /Bruce > >> > >> ...however, we could abstract that away in our tools, and use > >> OS-appropriate tools independently of what we're running on. There could > >> still be value in fixing devbind everyone knows and love to work on all > >> OS's without too much hassle :) > > > > Yes, easier script is always better. > > > > Another thought, I would like we think about integrating binding/unbinding > > code inside EAL and bus drivers, and manage it via the PMDs. > > There could be an option to bind on scan and unbind on rte_dev_remove. > > I didn't like it back when it was a thing, and i don't particularly like > this idea now, to be honest. Port binding should not be under purview of > the application, but is firmly in the domain of system administrator > IMO. I don't think it's our place to change system configuration while > we're running. Yes I agree, administration should be done separately. However, there are 3 scenarios to manage properly: - hotplug: can it be configured in advance? - dynamically release device to kernel - some drivers can share a device with the kernel