[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/6] ethdev: add port ownership

Ferruh Yigit ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Sun Jan 21 23:12:49 CET 2018


On 1/19/2018 6:10 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 19/01/2018 18:37, Neil Horman:
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 06:09:47PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> 19/01/2018 15:32, Neil Horman:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 03:07:28PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>>> 19/01/2018 14:57, Neil Horman:
>>>>>>>> I specifically pointed that out above.  There is no reason an owernship record
>>>>>>>> couldn't be added to the rte_eth_dev structure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, don't understand why.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because, thats the resource your trying to protect, and the object you want to
>>>>>> identify ownership of, no?
>>>>>
>>>>> No
>>>>> The rte_eth_dev structure is the port representation in the process.
>>>>> The rte_eth_dev_data structure is the port represenation across multi-process.
>>>>> The ownership must be in rte_eth_dev_data to cover multi-process protection.
>>>>>
>>>> Ok.   You get the idea though right?  That the port representation,
>>>> for some definition thereof, should embody the ownership state.
>>>> Neil
>>>
>>> Not sure to understand your question.
>>>
>> There is no real question here, only confirming that we are saying the same
>> thing.  I misspoke when I indicated ownership information should be embodied in
>> rte_eth_dev rather than its shared data.  But regardless, the concept is the
>> same
> 
> Yes we agree.
> And I think it is what Matan did.
> The owner is in struct rte_eth_dev_data:

Hi Thomas, Neil,

Sorry I did not able to this thred, is discussion concluded?


More information about the dev mailing list