From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Interrupt mode PMD Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 14:38:32 -0800 Message-ID: <20150228143832.1f4a08cf@urahara> References: <1424710542-14637-1-git-send-email-danny.zhou@intel.com> <1425012976-10173-1-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: David Marchand Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:38:25 +0100 David Marchand wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:56 AM, Cunming Liang = wrote: > v6 changes > =C2=A0- split rte_intr_wait_rx_pkt into two APIs 'wait' and 'set'. > =C2=A0- rewrite rte_intr_rx_wait/rte_intr_rx_set. > =C2=A0- using vector number instead of queue_id as interrupt API params. > =C2=A0- patch reorder and split. >=20 >=20 > Ok, so after looking at this patchset, I would say this is the right dire= ction, but still this is too limited. > The ethdev part and the vfio eventfds part look acceptable to me. > But thinking about it, I could just reuse a standard event library with t= he eventfds I would get from ethdev without a need for a new eal api. Also, you need to introduce a flag (in pci drv_flags?) so that application = can know if poll mode interrupt will work or not on the given device before configuring it.