Hi Bruce,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2016 5:32 AM
> To: Wang, Xiao W <xiao.w.wang at intel.com>
> Cc: Chen, Jing D <jing.d.chen at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 15/16] fm10k: use default mailbox message
> handler for pf
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 06:36:00PM +0800, Wang Xiao W wrote:
> > The new share code makes fm10k_msg_update_pvid_pf function static, so
> > we can not refer to it now in fm10k_ethdev.c. The registered pf
> > handler is almost the same as the default pf handler, removing it has no
> impact on mailbox.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wang Xiao W <xiao.w.wang at intel.com>
>
> What patch makes the function static, as we need to ensure that the build is
> not broken by having this patch in the wrong place in the patchset?
>
> Also, it seems strange having this patch in the middle of a series of base
> code
> updates - perhaps it should go first, so that all base code update patches can
> go one after the other.
>
> /Bruce
It's the first patch in the patch set that makes the function static.
The 0015.patch and 0016.patch are two extra fix patches made by myself. The
0015 is for the
"static fm10k_msg_update_pvid_pf " issue, the 0016 adds back a few macro
definitions
which are removed in shared code but are needed in dpdk/fm10k, I add these
necessary
macros into fm10k/base/fm10k_osdep.h which is controlled by dpdk driver.
I put the two extra (15/16, 16/16) fix patches last, (15/16) is a change for
fm10k_ethdev.c,
so I prefix the subject with "fm10k: ", (16/16) is a change for
base/fm10k_osdep.h, so I prefix
the subject with "fm10k/base: ".
Best Regards,
Wang, Xiao
>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c | 17 ++---------------
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > index e967628..a118cf4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_ethdev.c
> > @@ -2367,29 +2367,16 @@ static const struct fm10k_msg_data
> fm10k_msgdata_vf[] = {
> > FM10K_TLV_MSG_ERROR_HANDLER(fm10k_tlv_msg_error),
> > };
> >
> > -/* Mailbox message handler in PF */
> > -static const struct fm10k_msg_data fm10k_msgdata_pf[] = {
> > - FM10K_PF_MSG_ERR_HANDLER(XCAST_MODES,
> fm10k_msg_err_pf),
> > - FM10K_PF_MSG_ERR_HANDLER(UPDATE_MAC_FWD_RULE,
> fm10k_msg_err_pf),
> > -
> FM10K_PF_MSG_LPORT_MAP_HANDLER(fm10k_msg_lport_map_p
> f),
> > - FM10K_PF_MSG_ERR_HANDLER(LPORT_CREATE,
> fm10k_msg_err_pf),
> > - FM10K_PF_MSG_ERR_HANDLER(LPORT_DELETE,
> fm10k_msg_err_pf),
> > -
> FM10K_PF_MSG_UPDATE_PVID_HANDLER(fm10k_msg_update_pvi
> d_pf),
> > - FM10K_TLV_MSG_ERROR_HANDLER(fm10k_tlv_msg_error),
> > -};
> > -
> > static int
> > fm10k_setup_mbx_service(struct fm10k_hw *hw) {
> > - int err;
> > + int err = 0;
> >
> > /* Initialize mailbox lock */
> > fm10k_mbx_initlock(hw);
> >
> > /* Replace default message handler with new ones */
> > - if (hw->mac.type == fm10k_mac_pf)
> > - err = hw->mbx.ops.register_handlers(&hw->mbx,
> fm10k_msgdata_pf);
> > - else
> > + if (hw->mac.type == fm10k_mac_vf)
> > err = hw->mbx.ops.register_handlers(&hw->mbx,
> fm10k_msgdata_vf);
> >
> > if (err) {
> > --
> > 1.9.3
> >
