[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-26 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 7/21/2016 5:41 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-07-21 16:41, Igor Ryzhov: >> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Ferruh Yigit >> wrote: >>> On 7/20/2016 5:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: The out-of-tree kernel code must be avoided. Moreover there is no good reason to keep this legacy

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-22 Thread Andriy Berestovskyy
Hi folks, Just to clarify. Thomas is talking about removing just the KNI ethtool (i.e. lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/ethtool/*). The major functionality of those 45K lines of code is to get the same MAC address on the KNI interface and the underlying igb/ixgbe NIC. At the moment the rest of the

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-21 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-21 13:20, Jay Rolette: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Ferruh Yigit > wrote: > > KNI ethtool is functional and maintained, and it may have users! > > > > Why just removing it, specially without providing an alternative? > > Is is good time to discuss KCP again? > > Yes, my product

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-21 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-21 16:41, Igor Ryzhov: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Ferruh Yigit > wrote: > > On 7/20/2016 5:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > The out-of-tree kernel code must be avoided. > > > Moreover there is no good reason to keep this legacy feature > > > which is only partially supported. >

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-21 Thread Jay Rolette
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-07-21 13:20, Jay Rolette: > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Ferruh Yigit > > wrote: > > > KNI ethtool is functional and maintained, and it may have users! > > > > > > Why just removing it, specially without providing an

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-21 Thread Jay Rolette
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 7/20/2016 5:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > The out-of-tree kernel code must be avoided. > > Moreover there is no good reason to keep this legacy feature > > which is only partially supported. > > > > As described earlier in this plan:

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce KNI ethtool removal

2016-07-20 Thread Thomas Monjalon
The out-of-tree kernel code must be avoided. Moreover there is no good reason to keep this legacy feature which is only partially supported. As described earlier in this plan: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-July/043606.html it will help to keep PCI ids in PMD code. Signed-off-by: