[dpdk-dev,v5,03/12] bus: add helper to find which bus holds a device
Checks
Commit Message
From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
---
lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_bus.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bus.h | 5 +++++
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
4 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
Comments
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 02:22:01AM +0200, Gaetan Rivet wrote:
> From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
> ---
> lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_bus.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bus.h | 5 +++++
> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Would it be useful to add a unit test for this function? That would help
with any future refactoring, and also indirectly test the other
functions added in the previous 2 patches.
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 05:31:45PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 02:22:01AM +0200, Gaetan Rivet wrote:
> > From: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
> > ---
> > lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
> > lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_bus.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bus.h | 5 +++++
> > lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/rte_eal_version.map | 1 +
> > 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> >
>
> Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
>
> Would it be useful to add a unit test for this function? That would help
> with any future refactoring, and also indirectly test the other
> functions added in the previous 2 patches.
Yes, I think it would be better to have unit-tests for those functions.
They can be a little tricky to get right, working with the layers of
callbacks.
I may be short on time for the next version though. I'll see.
@@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ DPDK_17.05 {
global:
rte_bus_find;
+ rte_bus_find_by_device;
rte_cpu_is_supported;
rte_log_dump;
rte_log_register;
@@ -165,3 +165,28 @@ rte_bus_find(rte_bus_cmp_t cmp,
}
return bus;
}
+
+static int
+cmp_rte_device(const struct rte_device *dev1, const void *_dev2)
+{
+ const struct rte_device *dev2 = _dev2;
+
+ return dev1 != dev2;
+}
+
+static int
+bus_find_device(const struct rte_bus *bus, const void *_dev)
+{
+ struct rte_device *dev;
+
+ if (bus->find_device == NULL)
+ return -1;
+ dev = bus->find_device(cmp_rte_device, _dev);
+ return dev == NULL;
+}
+
+struct rte_bus *
+rte_bus_find_by_device(const struct rte_device *dev)
+{
+ return rte_bus_find(bus_find_device, (const void *)dev, NULL);
+}
@@ -203,6 +203,11 @@ struct rte_bus *rte_bus_find(rte_bus_cmp_t cmp,
const struct rte_bus *start);
/**
+ * Find the registered bus for a particular device.
+ */
+struct rte_bus *rte_bus_find_by_device(const struct rte_device *dev);
+
+/**
* Helper for Bus registration.
* The constructor has higher priority than PMD constructors.
*/
@@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ DPDK_17.05 {
global:
rte_bus_find;
+ rte_bus_find_by_device;
rte_cpu_is_supported;
rte_intr_free_epoll_fd;
rte_log_dump;