On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 09:57:25AM +0000, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> 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 available
> > on virtualization platforms from Wind River Systems. The Wind River Systems 
> > virtualization
> > 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 performance
> > focused applications."
> > 
> > I am afraid  just "memory_device" will have some misunderstanding.
> > Could we put it as "avp device (shared memory based)"?
> > 
> > 
> Hi,
> 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?

Definite +1.

It's used for packet IO into a vm, like virtio, and it's driver is in

"If it looks like a NIC, and quacks like a NIC, then it probably is a
NIC". [Alternatively if it looks and quacks like a duck, I'm not sure
what it's doing in DPDK!]


Reply via email to