From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [RFC] Kernel Control Path (KCP) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 18:21:52 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20170526165228.96919-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <3497879.P1UMQ6Rz4g@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 650DC559A for ; Tue, 13 Jun 2017 19:21:54 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <3497879.P1UMQ6Rz4g@xps> 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 5/30/2017 11:55 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 26/05/2017 18:52, Ferruh Yigit: >> We are looking for re-sending [1] the Kernel Control Path (KCP) >> with some updates [2]. >> >> Mainly this is an usability improvement for DPDK. >> >> And a quick reminder about what KCP is: >> >> "KCP is Linux virtual network interface that can control DPDK ports". >> >> So DPDK interfaces, somehow will be visible and it will be possible to >> use common Linux tools on DPDK interfaces. > > Reminder: the Mellanox PMDs live with their upstream kernel modules, > allowing such features. > > The best model would be to have control path in kernel for every PMDs. That is the intention with this feature. > > Anyway, do you think KCP (or NCI) could be upstreamed in any way? Unfortunately I believe the answer is same, it may not be possible to upsteam this kernel module. Should this fact block the feature?