2016-11-10 14:12, Shreyansh Jain: > On Thursday 10 November 2016 01:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-11-10 15:51, Jianbo Liu: > >> On 10 November 2016 at 15:26, Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com> > >> wrote: > >>> This is what the current outline of eth_driver is: > >>> > >>> +------------------------+ > >>> | eth_driver | > >>> | +---------------------+| > >>> | | rte_pci_driver || > >>> | | +------------------+|| > >>> | | | rte_driver ||| > >>> | | | name[] ||| > >>> | | | ... ||| > >>> | | +------------------+|| > >>> | | .probe || > >>> | | .remove || > >>> | | ... || > >>> | +---------------------+| > >>> | .eth_dev_init | > >>> | .eth_dev_uninit | > >>> +------------------------+ > >>> > >>> This is what I was thinking: > >>> > >>> +---------------------+ +----------------------+ > >>> | rte_pci_driver | |eth_driver | > >>> | +------------------+| _|_struct rte_driver *p | > >>> | | rte_driver <-------/ | .eth_dev_init | > >>> | | ... || | .eth_dev_uninit | > >>> | | name || +----------------------+ > >>> | | <more> || > >>> | +------------------+| > >>> | <PCI specific info>| > >>> +---------------------+ > >>> > >>> ::Impact:: > >>> Various drivers use the rte_pci_driver embedded in the eth_driver object > >>> for > >>> device initialization. > >>> == They assume that rte_pci_driver is directly embedded and hence simply > >>> dereference. > >>> == e.g. eth_igb_dev_init() in drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c file > >>> > >>> With the above change, such drivers would have to access rte_driver and > >>> then > >>> perform container_of to obtain their respective rte_xxx_driver. > >>> == this would be useful in case there is a non-PCI driver > >>> > >>> ::Problem:: > >>> I am not sure of reason as to why eth_driver embedded rte_pci_driver in > >>> first place - other than a convenient way to define it before PCI driver > >>> registration. > >>> > >>> As all the existing PMDs are impacted - am I missing something here in > >>> making the above change? > >>> > >> > >> How do you know eth_driver->p is pointing to a rte_pci_driver or > >> rte_soc_driver? > >> Maybe you need to add a type/flag in rte_driver. > > > > Why do you need any bus information at ethdev level? > > AFAIK, we don't need it. Above text is not stating anything on that > grounds either, I think. Isn't it?
No, I was replying to Jianbo. Anyway, David made a more interesting comment.
