Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shani Peretz <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2025 8:09 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; Shani Peretz <[email protected]>;
> Parav Pandit <[email protected]>; Xueming Li <[email protected]>;
> Nipun Gupta <[email protected]>; Nikhil Agarwal
> <[email protected]>; Hemant Agrawal <[email protected]>;
> Sachin Saxena <[email protected]>; Xu, Rosen <[email protected]>;
> Chenbo Xia <[email protected]>; Tomasz Duszynski
> <[email protected]>; Chengwen Feng
> <[email protected]>; Long Li <[email protected]>; Wei Hu
> <[email protected]>; Richardson, Bruce <[email protected]>;
> Laatz, Kevin <[email protected]>; Tyler Retzlaff
> <[email protected]>; Jan Blunck <[email protected]>
> Subject: [PATCH v5 2/4] lib: fix comparison between devices
> 
> DPDK supports multiple formats for specifying buses, (such as "0000:08:00.0"
> and "08:00.0" for PCI).
> This flexibility can lead to inconsistencies when using one format while
> running testpmd, then attempts to use the other format in a later command,
> resulting in a failure.
> 
> The issue arises from the find_device function, which compares the user-
> provided string directly with the device->name in the rte_device structure.
> If we want to accurately compare these names, we'll need to bring both
> sides to the same representation by invoking the parse function on the user
> input.
> 
> The proposed solution is to utilize the parse function implemented by each
> bus. When comparing names, we will call parse on the supplied string as well
> as on the device name itself and compare the results.
> As part of the change the parse function will now return the size of the
> parsed address.
> 
> This will allow consistent comparisons between different representations of
> same devices.
> 
> In addition, fixed vdev test to use the rte_cmp_dev_name function instead
> of the custom one.
> 
> Fixes: a3ee360f4440 ("eal: add hotplug add/remove device")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shani Peretz <[email protected]>


Reviewed-by: Rosen Xu <[email protected]>

Reply via email to