Hi David, > -----Original Message----- > From: David Marchand [mailto:david.marchand at 6wind.com] > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 7:52 PM > To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain at nxp.com>; Thomas Monjalon > <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com>; Jan Viktorin <viktorin at rehivetech.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/25] Introducing rte_driver/rte_device > generalization > > Commenting in the cover letter because these are details and it is > easier to track down what is missing before push for Thomas.
OK. Should I still wait for more patch level comments before releasing v11? > > > > driver: init/uninit common wrappers for PCI drivers > > In this patch subject, init/uninit -> prove/remove. Ok. I will do this. > > > > eal: define container macro > > This patch is fine, but not used in the patchset. I would postpone it > until we actually need it. I introduced this based on the merging of Jan's series and subsequent use in SoC framework series. But, yes, it is not being used in this series. I will remove it. > > > > eal: extract vdev infra > > This patch commit log tells that the vdev register macro does not call > DRIVER_EXPORT_NAME while it actually does so. Yes, I updated the patch based on your suggestion but didn't notice that I had put a counter notice about this in commit log in v9. I will remove this. > > > > eal: remove unused PMD types > > This patch commit log has some outdated note about pmdinfo. Well, this patch didn't update the documentation and I was not sure if the only change for PMD Info tool is in the mk file as per your patch. I will change the suggested patch and add documentation related note in the commit log. > > We still have a reference about PMD_REGISTER_DRIVER in the > documentation that could be replaced with a note on > DRIVER_REGISTER_PCI() Are you suggesting in the code as a comment? If so, I don't think that is good idea. > But I would do this in "drivers: convert all phy drivers as PCI drivers". If I have to update, I will use the above patch. > > > > eal/pci: replace PCI devinit/devuninit with probe/remove > > This patch only replaces the init/uninit methods with prove/remove for pci. > I would generalise this to vdev as well. That is because I didn't like using 'probe/remove' for VDEV. The semantic of probing is not really correct for a virtual device. We 'add' and initialize the virtual device actually. If you and other still feel that making it analogous with PCI probe/remove, I will update it. > > > -- > David Marchand Thanks a lot for your time and comments. - Shreyansh