On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:46:29AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 18/01/2018 08:35, Yuanhan Liu: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:34:08PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > So does it make sense to separate them logically? Perhaps as "device > > > identifier" > > > and "device args". > > > > Then I think it returns back to the old issue: how could we identify a > > port when the bus id (say BDF for PCI bus) is not enough for identifying > > a port? Such case could happen when a single NIC has 2 ports sharing > > the same BDF. It could also happen with the VF representors that will > > be introduced shortly. > > Yes, the device matching syntax must include bus category, class category > and driver category. So any device can be identified in future. > > But I think Ferruh is talking about separating device matching > (which is described in this proposal) and device settings > (which are usually mixed in -w and --vdev options). > I agree there are different things and may be separate. > They could share the same syntax (bus/class/driver) but be separate > with a semicolon: > matching;settings
Can you give an example? -- Gaëtan Rivet 6WIND
