On 14-Feb-18 12:48 AM, Zhang, Xiaohua wrote:
Hi Yigit and Anantoly,
I checked the nics-17.11.pdf, the following is description:
"The Accelerated Virtual Port (AVP) device is a shared memory based device only 
on virtualization platforms from Wind River Systems. The Wind River Systems 
platform currently uses QEMU/KVM as its hypervisor and as such provides support 
for all of
the QEMU supported virtual and/or emulated devices (e.g., virtio, e1000, etc.). 
The platform
offers the virtio device type as the default device when launching a virtual 
machine or creating
a virtual machine port. The AVP device is a specialized device available to 
customers that
require increased throughput and decreased latency to meet the demands of their 
focused applications."

I am afraid  just "memory_device" will have some misunderstanding.
Could we put it as "avp device (shared memory based)"?


Well, from AVP PMD documentation, it seems that AVP is classified as a NIC. Can't we just add it to the list of NICs, even if it's not Ethernet class 0x20xx? Pattern-matching in devbind should work either way. For example, you can see there's "cavium_pkx" already classified as a NIC, even though its class is 08xx, not 02xx. So why not this one?

Alternatively, if you think that would be confusing, how about instead of "memory devices" call it "other devices", for cases which don't fit into one of the DPDK categories?

Xiaohua Zhang

-----Original Message-----
From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 7:07 PM
To: BURAKOV, ANATOLY; Zhang, Xiaohua; dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] usertools/dpdk-devbind.py: add support for wind 
river avp device

On 2/13/2018 10:06 AM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
On 13-Feb-18 1:43 AM, Zhang, Xiaohua wrote:
Hi Anatoly,
AVP is a virtual NIC type, so you are right.

When using the AVP device, you will see the following information from lspci 
Slot:       0000:00:05.0
Class:      Unclassified device [00ff]
Vendor:   Red Hat, Inc [1af4]
Device:    Virtio memory balloon [1002]
SVendor:          Red Hat, Inc [1af4]
SDevice:           Device [0005]
PhySlot:            5
Driver:    virtio-pci

It is a little different with the standard "Ethernet" controller, such as "Class:  
Ethernet controller [0200]".
Theoretically, the AVP is a memory based device. That's the reason, I put it as 
separate catalog.

OK, fair enough. Is there any way we can make this category
not-WindRiver AVP specific? Are there other similar devices out there
that could potentially fit into this category?

Can we call it "memory_devices" instead of "avp_devices" ?

Xiaohua Zhang

-----Original Message-----


Is there any particular reason why this device appears in its own category, 
rather than being added to one of the existing device classes?
I'm not familiar with AVP but it looks like it's a NIC, so shouldn't it be in 
network_devices category?



Reply via email to