From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>
Subject: Re: Having troubles binding an SR-IOV VF to
 uio_pci_generic on Amazon instance
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 13:55:15 +0300
Message-ID: <560D1113.7080202@scylladb.com>
References: <20150930204016.GA29975@redhat.com>
 <20151001113828-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <560CF44A.60102@scylladb.com>
 <20151001120027-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560CFB66.5050904@scylladb.com>
 <20151001123335-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560D028A.8050509@scylladb.com>
 <20151001131517-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
 <560D09E4.4060603@scylladb.com> <560D0A0D.8030604@scylladb.com>
 <20151001133906-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com
 [209.85.212.179]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B86E8D8D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  1 Oct 2015 12:55:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so27161114wic.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 03:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20151001133906-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>



On 10/01/2015 01:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 01:25:17PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> Why use a VF on a non-virtualized system?
> 1. So a userspace bug does not destroy your hardware
>     (PFs generally assume trusted non-buggy drivers, VFs
>      generally don't).

People who use dpdk trust their drivers (those drivers are the reason 
for the system to exist in the first place).

> 2. So you can use a PF or another VF for regular networking.

This is valid, but usually those systems have a separate management 
network.  Unfortunately VFs limit the number of queues you can expose, 
making them less performant than PFs.

The "bifurcated drivers" were meant as a way of enabling this 
functionality without resorting to VFs, but it seems they are stalled.

> 3. So you can manage this system, to some level.
>

Again existing practice doesn't follow this.