On 2015/02/18 10:17, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-02-17 19:26, Tetsuya Mukawa: >> On 2015/02/17 18:23, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> 2015-02-17 17:51, Tetsuya Mukawa: >>>> On 2015/02/17 10:48, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>> 2015-02-16 13:14, Tetsuya Mukawa: >>>>>> +/* attach the new physical device, then store port_id of the device */ >>>>>> +static int >>>>>> +rte_eal_dev_attach_pdev(struct rte_pci_addr *addr, uint8_t *port_id) >>>>>> +{ >>>>>> + uint8_t new_port_id; >>>>>> + struct rte_eth_dev devs[RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS]; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if ((addr == NULL) || (port_id == NULL)) >>>>>> + goto err; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + /* save current port status */ >>>>>> + if (rte_eth_dev_save(devs, sizeof(devs))) >>>>>> + goto err; >>>>>> + /* re-construct pci_device_list */ >>>>>> + if (rte_eal_pci_scan()) >>>>>> + goto err; >>>>>> + /* invoke probe func of the driver can handle the new device */ >>>>>> + if (rte_eal_pci_probe_one(addr)) >>>>>> + goto err; >>>>> You should get the port_id from the previous function instead of >>>>> searching it. >>>> I agree this will beautify this code, but actually to do like above >>>> changes current DPDK code much more, and it will not be clear, and not >>>> beautiful. >>>> >>>> Could I explain it more. >>>> Problem is initialization sequence of virtual device and physical device >>>> are completely different. >>>> >>>> (1) Attaching a physical device case >>>> - To return port id, pci_invoke_all_drivers() needs to return port id. >>>> - It means "devinit" of "struct rte_pci_driver" needs to return port_id. >>>> - "devinit" will be rte_eth_dev_init(). But if the device is virtual, >>>> this function is not implemented. >>>> >>>> (2) Attaching virtual device case >>>> - To return port id from rte_eal_pci_probe_one(), >>>> pci_invoke_all_drivers() needs to return port id. >>>> - It means "init" of "struct rte_driver" needs to return port_id. >>>> - "init" will be implemented in PMD. But this function has different >>>> usage in physical device and virtual device. >>>> - Especially, In the case of physical device, "init" doesn't allocate >>>> eth device, so cannot return port id. >>>> >>>> As a result, to remove rte_eth_dev_save() and >>>> rte_eth_dev_get_changed_port(), below different functions needs to >>>> return port id. >>>> - "devinit" of "struct rte_pci_driver". >>>> - "init" of "struct rte_driver". >>> Yes, exactly, >>> I think you shouldn't hesitate to improve existing EAL code. >>> And I also think we should try to remove differences between virtual and >>> pci devices. >> I strongly agree with it. But I haven't investigated how to remove it so >> far. >> To be honest, I want to submit hotplug patches to DPDK-2.0. >> Is above functionality needed to merge the hotplug patches? >> I guess I will not be able to remove it by 23rd. > Obviously, it would be better to have it in dpdk-2.0.0-rc1. > If not possible to fix it, would it be possible to work on other comments > and keep this cleanup for post-rc1 integration? > I feel this cleanup is important to get the right design but it wouldn't be > fair to block this (old) patchset for this reason. >
I appreciate for your suggestion. I will keep working on it for post-rc1. Thanks, Tetsuya