Hi David,
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:04 AM, David Marchand <david.marchand at 6wind.com> wrote: > Hello Ravi, Tetsuya, > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Ravi Kerur <rkerur at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Let us know how you want us to fix this? To fix rte_eal_vdev_init and >> rte_eal_pci_probe_one to return allocated port_id we had 2 approaches >> mentioned in earlier discussion. In addition to those we have another >> approach with changes isolated only to rte_ether component. I am attaching >> diffs (preliminary) with this email. Please let us know your inputs since >> it involves EAL component. >> > > - This patch looks like a good ethdev cleanup (even if it really lacks > some context / commit log). > > I wonder just why you only take the first part of the name in > rte_eth_dev_get_port_by_name(). > Would not this match, let's say, both toto and toto0 vdevs ? > Is this intended ? > > It was not intended, i will look into it. > > - In the end, with this patch, do we still need to update eal ? > Looking at the code, I am not sure anymore. > Approach 3 (preliminary diffs sent as an attachment) doesn't involve EAL but the other two solutions do. So please let us know which one you prefer. I will send updated patch. Thanks, Ravi > > > > -- > David Marchand >