[dpdk-dev] Clarification for eth_driver changes
Shreyansh Jain
shreyansh.jain at nxp.com
Thu Nov 10 09:42:07 CET 2016
On Thursday 10 November 2016 01:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-11-10 15:51, Jianbo Liu:
>> On 10 November 2016 at 15:26, Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com> wrote:
>>> This is what the current outline of eth_driver is:
>>>
>>> +------------------------+
>>> | eth_driver |
>>> | +---------------------+|
>>> | | rte_pci_driver ||
>>> | | +------------------+||
>>> | | | rte_driver |||
>>> | | | name[] |||
>>> | | | ... |||
>>> | | +------------------+||
>>> | | .probe ||
>>> | | .remove ||
>>> | | ... ||
>>> | +---------------------+|
>>> | .eth_dev_init |
>>> | .eth_dev_uninit |
>>> +------------------------+
>>>
>>> This is what I was thinking:
>>>
>>> +---------------------+ +----------------------+
>>> | rte_pci_driver | |eth_driver |
>>> | +------------------+| _|_struct rte_driver *p |
>>> | | rte_driver <-------/ | .eth_dev_init |
>>> | | ... || | .eth_dev_uninit |
>>> | | name || +----------------------+
>>> | | <more> ||
>>> | +------------------+|
>>> | <PCI specific info>|
>>> +---------------------+
>>>
>>> ::Impact::
>>> Various drivers use the rte_pci_driver embedded in the eth_driver object for
>>> device initialization.
>>> == They assume that rte_pci_driver is directly embedded and hence simply
>>> dereference.
>>> == e.g. eth_igb_dev_init() in drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c file
>>>
>>> With the above change, such drivers would have to access rte_driver and then
>>> perform container_of to obtain their respective rte_xxx_driver.
>>> == this would be useful in case there is a non-PCI driver
>>>
>>> ::Problem::
>>> I am not sure of reason as to why eth_driver embedded rte_pci_driver in
>>> first place - other than a convenient way to define it before PCI driver
>>> registration.
>>>
>>> As all the existing PMDs are impacted - am I missing something here in
>>> making the above change?
>>>
>>
>> How do you know eth_driver->p is pointing to a rte_pci_driver or rte_soc_driver?
>> Maybe you need to add a type/flag in rte_driver.
>
> Why do you need any bus information at ethdev level?
>
AFAIK, we don't need it. Above text is not stating anything on that
grounds either, I think. Isn't it?
-
Shreyansh
More information about the dev
mailing list