> On 8 Apr 2019, at 17:35, Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 01:01:29 +0100 > Damjan Marion <dmar...@me.com> wrote: > >>> On 30 Mar 2019, at 00:58, Sirshak Das <sirshak....@arm.com> wrote: >>> >>> Apologies, DPDK build failure is not valid. wipe-release fixed it for me. >>> One help still required would be a sample config for using the rdma-core >>> instead of DPDK would like see the performance difference. >> >> rdma-core is work in progress, today it functionally work but you cannot >> expect great performance. >> We are going to add direct descriptor ring access for mlx5 similar to what >> dpdk does. >> >> Stay tuned…. >> > > The rdma-core stuff is likely to be a problem on Azure. The Mellanox device > is always hidden as > a secondary device behind a synthetic virtual device based on VMBus. There > are two DPDK different > ways this is used. One is with vdev_netvsc/failsafe/tap and the other is with > netvsc PMD. > In either case, the virtual device expects to see the MLX device show up as a > VF if enabled. > > So unless you want to write native VPP drivers for VMBus as well, I don't see > how having native > rdma-core driver will help. It will only get confused.
Why not :) Is there any spec?
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#12732): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/12732 Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/30795618/21656 Group Owner: vpp-dev+ow...@lists.fd.io Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
