[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/thunderx: add empty link up/down callbacks
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Thu Apr 13 13:04:51 CEST 2017
On 4/3/2017 4:13 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 03:57:48PM +0200, Andriy Berestovskyy wrote:
>> Some applications and DPDK examples expect link up/down
>> functionality to be provided.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andriy Berestovskyy <Andriy.Berestovskyy at caviumnetworks.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c
>> index 1060319..984c218 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c
>> @@ -1924,11 +1924,25 @@ nicvf_dev_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int
>> +nicvf_dev_set_link_up(struct rte_eth_dev *dev __rte_unused)
>> +{
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +nicvf_dev_set_link_down(struct rte_eth_dev *dev __rte_unused)
>> +{
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
>
> Since the VF drivers can't really initiate link_up and link_down and
> other VF drivers like i40e VF is not setting this callback. I think, it is
> OK keep it as -ENOSUP(which is default).
>
> Since Christain Acked on the fix on the usage of examples/ip_pipeline
> application. Probably we are OK without this change.
Any update planned to this patch? Should I update this as nack?
>
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/062704.html
>
> Any thought from ethdev maintainers?
>
>> +
>> /* Initialize and register driver with DPDK Application */
>> static const struct eth_dev_ops nicvf_eth_dev_ops = {
>> .dev_configure = nicvf_dev_configure,
>> .dev_start = nicvf_dev_start,
>> .dev_stop = nicvf_dev_stop,
>> + .dev_set_link_up = nicvf_dev_set_link_up,
>> + .dev_set_link_down = nicvf_dev_set_link_down,
>> .link_update = nicvf_dev_link_update,
>> .dev_close = nicvf_dev_close,
>> .stats_get = nicvf_dev_stats_get,
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
More information about the dev
mailing list