From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31C538F5D for ; Wed, 8 May 2024 01:58:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715133489; cv=none; b=ZhUxjlwU10z0NKBQvcuG4qrVwahPXR/qVQl7gEoES6mQ7WnIskuVaiWzAfrLdntbo9D/j7FA2r8MpL3yXZIT6hxm64HmmUvnVdF/WSAhKKD+U7ler0EKMQMeAgLo/Yi6OkKdkswqMyNlLyrPW/W3JV5l9ruE6H6Wt5RkTuriAvM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715133489; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AwOrdjNpKBUxDaG6VzaMatxoAfFKK+SCQzpC5QdRKiA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=W10T4YsAOt1saB3x3TSbP1nyK8YlTslyZUQTPeg16wF4A9hHIKrWvMCDtnEtNyKeSvvhHzaNaBtdJVR8iJlp6oWdLiJ+MU5SGrGg/+Wn7ObvC/728WVUFrf2GpQshhpcmffX/Kx6OOxLO7TcdzAYOlpVf8/NhvV9w7yvl3O0Pgg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ejM8njBn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ejM8njBn" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6C37C2BBFC; Wed, 8 May 2024 01:58:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1715133488; bh=AwOrdjNpKBUxDaG6VzaMatxoAfFKK+SCQzpC5QdRKiA=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=ejM8njBnJG4XryBFSpcdwSasXMceiCLXgLMBYGPaioJ68P+r3aVEFSHcOD/IH4Pbm flcDTcW9PnI3viAa8j1Mu9oGw3wjKFVTVQVi5XZRKichmeCL9fysE7xi6jpbSAegMW Sxlv55U4iA4lveF6Erizf7+89RERzczPg2K26GrqQNZsYjbUZRicKO89ThHYvIlsZk P9+TlEVC39EwrdE+/Q/VhxOmQZka57W+rB7AGhf34BewXM1aEJqZ6wxcm6DCt0lqdr hJ6YnN5vYYmaFl9zC2JWqlFyBIw+bIOxcMgSuWGquj/p/C/tyogQZoGyrNZuCGbXBt SVNLFyYoH/f1g== Message-ID: <438c1e8f-b29f-4ab7-866a-fc5688e918f3@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 19:58:06 -0600 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Driver and H/W APIs Workshop at netdevconf Content-Language: en-US To: Mina Almasry , Jakub Kicinski Cc: Jacob Keller , Alexander Lobakin , Saeed Mahameed , Tariq Toukan , Jason Gunthorpe , Andrew Gospodarek , "michael.chan@broadcom.com" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Jiri Pirko , Alexander Duyck , Willem de Bruijn , Pavel Begunkov , David Wei , Shailend Chand References: <20240506180632.2bfdc996@kernel.org> From: David Ahern In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/7/24 12:17 PM, Mina Almasry wrote: > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 6:06 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> >> On Mon, 6 May 2024 13:59:31 -0600 David Ahern wrote: >>> Suggested topics based on recent netdev threads include >>> - devlink - extensions, shortcomings, ... >>> - extension to memory pools >>> - new APIs for managing queues >>> - challenges of netdev / IB co-existence (e.g., driven by AI workloads) >>> - fwctl - a proposal for direct firmware access >> >> Memory pools and queue API are more of stack features. >> Please leave them out of your fwctl session. >> >> Aren't people who are actually working on those things submitting >> talks or hosting better scoped discussions? It appears you haven't >> CCed any of them.. >> > > Me/Willem/Pavel/David/Shailend (I know, list is long xD), submitted a > Devem TCP + Io_uring joint talk. We don't know if we'll get accepted. > So far we plan to cover netmem + memory pools out of that list. We > didn't plan to cover queue-API yet because we didn't have it accepted > at talk submission time, but we just got it accepted so I was gonna > reach out anyway to see if folks would be OK to have it in our talk. > > Any objection to having queue-API discussed as part of our talk? Or > add some of us to yours? I'm fine with whatever. Just thought it fits > well as part of this Devmem TCP + io_uring talk. > The queue API is a suggested topic given its newness. The current 4 ndos and "ndo_queue_mem_size" were created based on gve. Are they sufficient for other hardware vendors? Are extensions needed? Other use cases? Discussions items if needed; maybe what exists is fine. Either way if someone wanted to discuss, the scope for the workshop would be driver APIs and down (driver code only). Your use case is a driver capability upward. To me a clear boundary.