From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] net/pcap: physical interface MAC support Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:44:43 +0100 Message-ID: <1a263f7c-c40f-28ad-e85a-88abf84b8853@intel.com> References: <1523969590-40071-1-git-send-email-juhamatti.kuusisaari@coriant.com> <45878138-737a-1aca-4ff5-76ef59e2af1c@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Thomas Monjalon To: "Kuusisaari, Juhamatti" Return-path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D60A75F32 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:44:45 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 4/18/2018 5:35 AM, Kuusisaari, Juhamatti wrote: > Hello Ferruh, > >> On 4/17/2018 1:53 PM, Juhamatti Kuusisaari wrote: >>> Support for PCAP MAC address using physical interface MAC. >>> Support for getting proper link status, speed and duplex. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Juhamatti Kuusisaari >>> --- >>> config/common_base | 1 + >>> drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c | 52 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >>> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/config/common_base b/config/common_base index >>> c2b0d91..9804585 100644 >>> --- a/config/common_base >>> +++ b/config/common_base >>> @@ -410,6 +410,7 @@ CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_NULL=y # Compile >> software >>> PMD backed by PCAP files # CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_PCAP=n >>> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_PMD_PCAP_IF_MAC_SUPPORT=n >> >> Hi Juhamatti, >> >> Why a build time config option for this? Can we make it a runtime devarg? > > Sure, we can make it a devarg. Or do we even need that? Are there a lot of test dependencies that would need to be fixed if we have it enabled by default? Not test dependencies but this may be overkill for some usecases, I prefer making this dynamically configurable, no strong opinion though. > >> Overall we are trying to reduce config options already and this seems no >> need to be build time option at all. >> >> btw, this is a little late in release cycle, so lets target this patch for next >> release. > > The patch is on top of net-next, this should be just fine. Perhaps we should rename the sub-tree :) because this is not happening first time. next-net is not for next release, as it has been Linux, it is for this release but just a sub-tree for net PMDs. > >> Thanks, >> ferruh > > Thanks, > -- > Juhamatti >