From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:44:29 +0000
Message-ID: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CF32CE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <248236628.l6b5mhHNAu@xps13> <1623193.ZGhhn5RSHY@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "vincent.jardin@6wind.com"
 <vincent.jardin@6wind.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, "Zhang, Helin"
 <helin.zhang@intel.com>, "Chen, Jing D" <jing.d.chen@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EAC52C35
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 05:44:33 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <1623193.ZGhhn5RSHY@xps13>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 7:35 AM
> To: Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Chen, Jing D <jing.d.chen@intel.com>
> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; vincent.jardin@6wind.com;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: i40e SR-IOV with Linux PF
>=20
> +Cc dev@dpdk.org
>=20
> 2017-03-13 15:29, Thomas Monjalon:
> > Hi i40e developers,
> >
> > Referring to the VFD discussion, I thought basic behaviours were the
> > same regardless of the PF driver:
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/053056.html
> > "
> > > In the meanwhile, we have some test models ongoing to validate
> > > combination of Linux and DPDK drivers for VF and PF.
> > > We'll fully support below 4 cases going forward.
> > > 1. DPDK PF + DPDK VF
> > > 2. DPDK PF + Linux VF
> > > 3. Linux PF + DPDK VF
> > > 4. Linux PF + Linux VF (it's not our scope)
> > [...]
> > > Linux PF + DPDK VF has been tested with 1.0 API long time ago.
> > > There is some test activities ongoing.
> > "
> >
> > I think the Linux PF case is important and deserves more consideration.
> > When looking at the code, specifically i40evf_vlan_offload_set() and
> > i40evf_vlan_pvid_set(), I read this:
> > "
> >     /* Linux pf host doesn't support vlan offload yet */
> >     if (vf->version_major =3D=3D I40E_DPDK_VERSION_MAJOR) { "
> >
> > Is there some work in progress on Linux side to get the same behaviour
> > as with a DPDK PF?
> >

As I know, VFD features are marked with an "EXPERIMENTAL" tag.
And we are working on the extendable interface (feature based) with
PF kernel driver.=20