On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 19:57:18 +0530 Shreyansh jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com> wrote:
[...] > >>> @@ -1431,7 +1524,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_info_get(uint8_t port_id, struct > >>> rte_eth_dev_info *dev_info) > >>> > >>> RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->dev_infos_get); > >>> (*dev->dev_ops->dev_infos_get)(dev, dev_info); > >>> - dev_info->pci_dev = dev->pci_dev; > >>> + dev_info->soc_dev = dev->soc_dev; > >> > >> I think both the members, pci_dev and soc_dev, should be updated by this > >> call. > >> Is there some specific reason why soc_dev is the only one which is getting > >> updated? > > > > Yes, looks like a mistake. Thanks! And sorry for delayed reply. > > No problems - thanks for confirmation. > I have gone through almost complete series and as and when you rebase it, it > would have my ACK. OK, thanks. That's what I am playing with right now. I've rebased on v3 of this patch. There will be some more tests in my v2. > rte_driver patchset which I sent last are broken - I will publish an updated > version very soon. I am surprised that you've changed the args to RTE_EAL_PCI_REGISTER... Are you sure about this step? I wrote that I'll change it myself for v2 for SoC to accept name and pointer as it was originally for PCI... Jan
