Thanks, Thomas. Actually there is an EAL rte_eal_check_module() method which does this exactly: http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c#n1089 It is declared in eal_private.h.
Is it reasonable to send a patch which moves the decalartion to eal.h instead so PMDs can use it in their probe() method ? Apart from it - So is there any practical effect for using the RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP() ? or is it only a sort of declarative macro, saying that the PMD is dependent on the specified kernel modules ? In the past - did it really ever check for dependency and shouted back when the required modules specified in the RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP() macro were not found ? Regards, KW On Fri, May 25, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > 25/05/2018 11:55, Kevin Wilson: >> Hi, >> >> I am facing the following issue in DPDK 18.05-rc5 (I saw it also with earlier >> releases of DPDK from the last year). The issue is with defining >> dependency on a kernel module in a PMD. >> I want to develop a PMD which requiers that before running DPDK app which >> uses this PMD, a specified kernel module is required to be insmoded. >> I tried to add a call to RTE_PMD_REGISTER_KMOD_DEP in my PMD, >> specifying a required >> kernel module, and I expected that when calling a DPDK app which uses >> this PMD it will shout that such a kernel module is not loaded, but this did >> not >> happen. > > No such check is implemented currently. > You can try to implement a check in EAL in the probing function. > > >
