On 01/16/2019 10:21 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 16/01/2019 11:03, Ophir Munk: >> Hi Kevin and thank you for your comments. >> Please see inline... >> >> From: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]> >>> On 01/15/2019 09:47 AM, Ophir Munk wrote: >>>> Dpdk port representors were introduced in dpdk versions 18.xx. >>>> Prior to port representors there was a one-to-one relationship between >>>> an rte device (e.g. PCI bus) and an eth device (referenced as dpdk >>>> port id in OVS). With port representors the relationship becomes >>>> one-to-many rte device to eth devices. >>>> For example in [3] there are two devices (representors) using the same >>>> PCI physical address 0000:08:00.0: "0000:08:00.0,representor=[3]" and >>>> "0000:08:00.0,representor=[5]". >>>> This commit handles the new one-to-many relationship. For example, >>>> when one of the device port representors in [3] is closed - the PCI >>>> bus cannot be detached until the other device port representor is >>>> closed as well. OVS remains backward compatible by supporting dpdk >>>> legacy PCI ports which do not include port representors. >>>> Dpdk port representors related commits are listed in [1]. Dpdk port >>>> representors documentation appears in [2]. A sample configuration >>>> which uses two representors ports (the output of "ovs-vsctl show" >>>> command) is shown in [3]. >>>> >>> >>> Hi Ophir, I had a scan through and there isn't any documentation/examples >>> for this outside the commit message. I think a user would need something >>> basic, or at least reference to know that this exists and how to use it. > > The user needs to know the DPDK syntax to reference DPDK ports. > This documentation should be provided by DPDK. > We don't have a doc summarizing all at the moment (I will work on it). > I suggest you collect URLs for pieces of docs and list them in OVS doc > about dpdk-devargs. >
Yes, an OVS user will look at OVS docs (hopefully) but probably not commit messages or C code. Also, the reference has some nice testpmd examples. A simple OVS example would be nice, perhaps a section in ovs/Documentation/topics/dpdk/phy.rst with an example and links? >>>> [2] >>>> doc/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.rst >>>> >> >> I now realize that the reference given in [2] requires downloading DPDK. >> In v6 I will update it with a new reference: >> >> https://doc.dpdk.org/guides-18.08/prog_guide/switch_representation.html > > No need to specify a version: > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/switch_representation.html > Maybe better to specify 18.11 in case something is added/removed in later DPDK. >> which includes abundant of documentation/examples. >> Can you please have a look and let me know if it is sufficient, or maybe you >> have other ideas where more documentation should be added. > > There is also some documentation for representor syntax: > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/poll_mode_drv.html#ethernet-device-standard-device-arguments > > But honestly, I doubt you need to talk about representors in this patch. > The change is to support multi-ports device generally. ok, then just need a way to tell OVS user that the new functionality is existing. > The representor ports are just a use case of multi-ports. > Other use cases: > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/mlx4.html#implementation-details > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/cxgbe.html#limitations > For these use cases, we can use the mac= argument in devargs. > > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
