On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Alex Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 14:03 +0800, Jike Song wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Alex Williamson
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete? Does
>> > it imply deprecating the uio interface
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Alex Williamson
wrote:
>
> So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete? Does
> it imply deprecating the uio interface? I believe the feature that
> started this discussion was support for MSI/X interrupts so that VFs
> can support some kind o
On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 14:03 +0800, Jike Song wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Alex Williamson
> wrote:
> >
> > So it works.??Is it acceptable???Useful???Sufficiently complete???Does
> > it imply deprecating the uio interface???I believe the feature that
> > started this discussion was s
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Burakov, Anatoly
wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
>> I've re-posted the unified patch upstream and it should start showing up in
>> the next linux-next build. I expect the dpdk code won't be merged until
>> after this gets back into a proper kernel, but could we get the dpdk
>
Hi Alex,
> I've re-posted the unified patch upstream and it should start showing up in
> the next linux-next build. ?I expect the dpdk code won't be merged until
> after this gets back into a proper kernel, but could we get the dpdk
> modifications posted as rfc for others looking to try it?
I ha
On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 12:22 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 11:46 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 02:50:17PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 07:38 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 10:43 +, Yigit,
On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 11:46 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 02:50:17PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 07:38 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 10:43 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:43:59AM -0700, Al
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 02:50:17PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 07:38 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 10:43 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:43:59AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > <...>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 07:38 -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 10:43 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:43:59AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > <...>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Also I need to disable VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION ioctl,
> > > > > > > > beca
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:43:59AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
<...>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also I need to disable VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION ioctl, because in
> > > > > > vfio
> > > > > > module,
> > > > > > container->noiommu is not set before doing a
> > > > > > vfio_group_set_container()
> > > >
On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 10:43 +, Yigit, Ferruh wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:43:59AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> <...>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also I need to disable VFIO_CHECK_EXTENSION ioctl,
> > > > > > > because in
> > > > > > > vfio
> > > > > > > module,
> > > > > > > containe
On 17/12/2015 20:38, Jan Viktorin wrote:
> which platforms (or computer systems) I am targeting?
It is about VMs on IOMMU capable systems. What if you need to use SRIOV
with IXGBE, or IGB devices?
For some DPDK cases, like Mellanox or virtio, you do not need to use
VFIO/UIO into the guests, so
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:09:23 +0100
Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2015-12-17 09:52, Burakov, Anatoly:
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > > So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete?
> > > > > > Does it imply deprecating
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 20:38:16 +0100
Jan Viktorin wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:09:23 +0100
> Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2015-12-17 09:52, Burakov, Anatoly:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > > > So it works. Is it acceptabl
Hi,
2015-12-17 09:52, Burakov, Anatoly:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete?
> > > > > Does it imply deprecating the uio interface? I believe the
> > > > > feature that started this d
Hi Thomas,
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete?
> > > > Does it imply deprecating the uio interface? I believe the
> > > > feature that started this discussion was supp
On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 17:22 +, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> > On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 08:35 +, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 04:04 +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson
> > > > >
2015-12-16 16:23, Burakov, Anatoly:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > So it works. Is it acceptable? Useful? Sufficiently complete? Does
> > > it imply deprecating the uio interface? I believe the feature that
> > > started this discu
Hi Alex,
> On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 08:35 +, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > > On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 04:04 +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > I tested the DPDK (HEAD of master) with the patch, with help of
> > >
Hi Thomas,
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > So it works. ?Is it acceptable? ?Useful? ?Sufficiently complete? ?Does
> > it imply deprecating the uio interface? ?I believe the feature that
> > started this discussion was support for MSI/X interrupts so that V
On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 08:35 +, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> > On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 04:04 +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > I tested the DPDK (HEAD of master) with the patch, with help of
> > > Anatoly, and DPDK wo
Hi Alex,
> On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 04:04 +, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > I tested the DPDK (HEAD of master) with the patch, with help of
> > Anatoly, and DPDK works in no-iommu environment with a little
> > modification.
> >
> > Bas
Friday, December 11, 2015 11:03 PM
> > > To: Vincent JARDIN; dev at dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] VFIO no-iommu
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:12 +0100, Vincent JARDIN wrote:
> > > > Thanks Thomas for putting back this topic.
>
bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alex
> > > > Williamson
> > > > Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 11:03 PM
> > > > To: Vincent JARDIN; dev at dpdk.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] VFIO no-iommu
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alex Williamson
> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 11:03 PM
> To: Vincent JARDIN; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] VFIO no-iommu
>
> On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:12 +0100, Vincent JAR
Hi,
I know a bit about VFIO implementation, have been debugging IOMMU (intel)
problems, know how QEMU/KVM work about using legacy or vfio attached
devices, and I'm the maintainer of a DPDK PMD recently accepted upstream
which requires our particular UIO driver (not maintained upstream). So I
gues
On Tue, 2015-12-15 at 13:43 +, O'Driscoll, Tim wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Alex
> > Williamson
> > Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 11:03 PM
> > To: Vincent JARDIN; dev at dpdk.org
> &
Hello,
I am not involved in the vfio very much, however, I was watching some
vfio-related code in last few weeks. It looks promising to me and
IMHO it seems to the best way to bring a support of integrated Ethernet
MACs into DPDK (related to many SoCs). Unfortunately, the ARMv7 SoCs (I
know) lacks
Thanks Thomas for putting back this topic.
Alex,
I'd like to hear more about the impacts of "unsupported":
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=033291eccbdb1b70ffc02641edae19ac825dc75d
Use of this mode, specifically binding a device without a native
IOM
Recently there were some discussions to have an upstream replacement
for our igb_uio module.
Several solutions were discussed (new uio driver, uio_pci_generic, vfio):
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/16/700
Alex Williamson (maintainer of VFIO driver), submitted a solution
and was waiting some
On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 23:12 +0100, Vincent JARDIN wrote:
> Thanks Thomas for putting back this topic.
>
> Alex,
>
> I'd like to hear more about the impacts of "unsupported":
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commi
> t/?id=033291eccbdb1b70ffc02641edae19ac825dc75d
>
31 matches
Mail list logo
