Re: [odp4vpp] project proposal

Edward Warnicke


I wanted to kick off the discussion on cleaning up the small clarity issues so we can close on your project creation next week.


while it would be awesome to have someone from kalray as an initial committer, we do need an actual person there :)

2)  I think there was some confusion wrt your scope:

Which I reproduce here to ease conversation:


1) VPP in SmartNICs

In this case, the scope of the work is centered on packet/IO in the SmartNIC hardware which exposes devices directly to consumers (PCI VF to a VM for instance or container netdev)

2) VPP in the host + accelerators or reconfigurable hardware

In this case, the scope of work encompasses:

  • Network IO integration with VPP
  • Mitigation of configuration from graph nodes and underlying hardware

Underlying hardware may include fixed function acceleration (crypto look aside, IPsec inline or look aside, compression, TCP termination…), programmable hardware (P4, SmartNIC, flow processors) or reconfigurable hardware (FPGA). Delegation of execution of parts of the VPP graph on the hardware may require addition of VPP APIs to exchange graph topology and or configuration with the networking layer. At this stage, architectural studies are not yet complete. Fixed function acceleration may not need those APIs.


I think there was a lot of confusion as to what the scope entailed.  Would it still capture your intended scope of work if we 'inverted' the scope to something more like:

To produce plugin(s) to vpp to enable vpp to take advantage hardware acceleration via ODP.

These plugin(s) may provide additional graph nodes, rewire the VPP graph to take advantage of those graph nodes, etc via the normal vpp plugin mechanisms.

Please note, I intentionally kept the above short and simple as a *starting point* for conversation, do not hesitate to suggest I have cut out some crucial detail, or otherwise changed the meaning of your scope.  The goal here is to capture your intent with fidelity while improving clarity to the reader :)


On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Joel Halpern <joel.halpern@...> wrote:

As a minor point (not an obstacle to approval), as I understand the process, the <tobeconfirmed> commiter  name will either need to be replaced with a person, or removed.





From: tsc-bounces@... [] On Behalf Of Francois Ozog
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2017 5:42 PM
To: Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...>
Cc: tsc@...; Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...>
Subject: Re: [tsc] [odp4vpp] project proposal




This Thursday would be perfect 






Le lun. 2 janv. 2017 à 23:40, Ed Warnicke <hagbard@...> a écrit :



Would you prefer Thu Jan 5, 2017 (this Thu) or Thu Jan 12, 2017 (next Thu)?



On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Francois Ozog <francois.ozog@...> wrote:

Dear members of TSC,

it is my pleasure to present this sub-project proposition:

I would like to propose a formal review around second week of January

2017 depending on TSC meeting calendar.




François-Frédéric Ozog | Director Linaro Networking Group


tsc mailing list


Join to automatically receive all group messages.