03/07/2018 17:03, Zhang, Qi Z: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > 03/07/2018 14:59, Zhang, Qi Z: > > > > > +do_eth_dev_attach(const char *devargs, uint16_t *port_id); > > > > > > > > So you are duplicating rte_eth_dev_attach which is flawed in its > > > > design and should be deprecated... > > > > > > OK, just to know this, but I guess it will not be the issue, if we move > > > the dev > > sync mechanism into eal layer in future right? > > > > Future is now :) > > We must stop mixing devargs and port id in the same layer. > > Ok, is there any RFC I can learn?
RFC for what? It is just a design issue that we must stop propagating. > > > > As you may have noticed, rte_eth_dev_attach() is calling > > > > rte_eal_hotplug_add() which manages the EAL device. > > > > It is wrong because the relation between an ethdev port and an EAL > > > > device is not a 1:1 mapping. > > > > We must manage the ethdev port as one of the possible abstractions > > > > of a device represented by rte_device.
