[PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support

[PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support

[Thomas Monjalon]

There were some efforts to fix Xen Dom0 support in 16.07:
	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/043823.html
But there is still at least one bug:
	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044207.html
And nobody cares:
	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044376.html

Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
---
 doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
index f502f86..6b8e9af 100644
--- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
@@ -41,3 +41,6 @@ Deprecation Notices
 * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated and
   will be removed in 16.11.
   It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions.
+
+* The support for Xen Dom0 is broken and seems not to be used.
+  It will be removed in 16.11.
-- 
2.7.0

Re: [PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support

[Christian Ehrhardt]

Hi Thomas,
just my two cents as Ubuntu DPDK maintainer (and part of the Debian Team
that does the same).

We never enabled CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_XEN_DOM0, we only did LIBRTE_PMD_XENVIRT
based on a user request we had.
That said we won't "take away" anything from anybody and so far had no
request to provide it.
The person that asked for the XEN_PMD was Thiago (set to CC as he might
have an opinion on that).

For me I think it is a good change to drop rather unmaintained parts to
make the rest more stable:
Acked-by: Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>

Christian Ehrhardt
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com
> wrote:

> There were some efforts to fix Xen Dom0 support in 16.07:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/043823.html
> But there is still at least one bug:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044207.html
> And nobody cares:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044376.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> ---
>  doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> index f502f86..6b8e9af 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> @@ -41,3 +41,6 @@ Deprecation Notices
>  * The mempool functions for single/multi producer/consumer are deprecated
> and
>    will be removed in 16.11.
>    It is replaced by rte_mempool_generic_get/put functions.
> +
> +* The support for Xen Dom0 is broken and seems not to be used.
> +  It will be removed in 16.11.
> --
> 2.7.0
>
>

Re: [PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support

[David Marchand]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Thomas Monjalon
<thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> There were some efforts to fix Xen Dom0 support in 16.07:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/043823.html
> But there is still at least one bug:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044207.html
> And nobody cares:
>         http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044376.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>

Lots of cleanups for 16.11 :-)

Acked-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support

[Mcnamara, John]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 9:20 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce removal of Xen Dom0 support
> 
> There were some efforts to fix Xen Dom0 support in 16.07:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/043823.html
> But there is still at least one bug:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044207.html
> And nobody cares:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/044376.html
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>

We would like some additional time to gauge customer usage of this feature and also the possibility of taking maintainership. So our preference would be to Nack the deprecation in this release. If there is no change/customer feedback we will Ack it in the next release.

So: Nack.

John