From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com (mail-wm0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C102B9C
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 3 Jan 2017 22:52:50 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id t79so440972293wmt.0
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 03 Jan 2017 13:52:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=iAwGg+MGfVR7G9QAoePsE7kkjZJSf+LLkcSm2KpCo/M=;
b=J23jYWA6OKxNveTd2TQWBec5xTStbzZ9o2q+fkhJKh8HpAHF4DCS/+jwa5/ZNa3xLY
dDgtwiKxpRMhrBioMSEnC64xHhHpIMn4Wc03Cvv0sZUUN0wMUHoLH3Js85vf2qAIYAoH
KlyEi29edfty3wZ9QCRAyx66oK6QskelRHR525wK5dJCKt71z+qeIxwdnX2zqA5w3r0V
UAigQriK3qejyp7ojs7cANmeW40lQ2DxQfc+0nlssuiy9c0TA8rmAOQ4fb+nXObNiS0K
0S6GPIPqrenLl5w594NRNOervGUBuE4HWLhJHKyyek4gY5l2oiHtuavZ8P+HQ0+jUKRD
vAqw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent
:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=iAwGg+MGfVR7G9QAoePsE7kkjZJSf+LLkcSm2KpCo/M=;
b=MC3oGPw6P4OXFXvpBWT/D9FBVACrdhqsyZ17NJrbCbgjR2YMBUKJkB5aiK89pvT6Pg
HqkOLM/QitAsbpGkjjrnnv2BjzbxkiKFxlkx6dayFtOo/lCWudoNHgWuzEn8lQm+AQLA
mquOOVz+CgoPhh6jRgtfPmC+LGgrmaNr8CHyCfp/SeNYTDBf3OSBYHWWKpy+EOUwK/jU
xoNoWX+rUCVVfjz1/88kruTDaUMI5/68beX3CCTEFawp8XVDzMj6VA4/Lo0jR3ixwECY
ankN7w+0l6xl6yJhPpYAOsOZrti8JOr17Gyl+poHYmrimaAzI3LkbyCV15ccjEmGCaMn
BW7A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJd/hchSiciRozWDL/8STyvpZUGUA06xOrc4cl8dnlcG4qLUN842bjJl5nHiB2Yztl4
X-Received: by 10.28.149.79 with SMTP id x76mr51912283wmd.27.1483480370312;
Tue, 03 Jan 2017 13:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c187sm91550381wmd.13.2017.01.03.13.52.49
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Tue, 03 Jan 2017 13:52:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
Cc: david.marchand@6wind.com, dev@dpdk.org
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 22:52:48 +0100
Message-ID: <12579803.ZHBMo4GdSA@xps13>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <1482758645-23057-2-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
References: <1482756644-13726-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
<1482758645-23057-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
<1482758645-23057-2-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 01/12] eal/bus: introduce bus abstraction
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2017 21:52:50 -0000
2016-12-26 18:53, Shreyansh Jain:
> +DPDK_17.02 {
> + global:
> +
> + rte_bus_list;
> + rte_eal_bus_add_device;
> + rte_eal_bus_add_driver;
> + rte_eal_bus_get;
> + rte_eal_bus_dump;
> + rte_eal_bus_register;
> + rte_eal_bus_insert_device;
> + rte_eal_bus_remove_device;
> + rte_eal_bus_remove_driver;
> + rte_eal_bus_unregister;
I think the prefix can be just rte_bus_ instead of rte_eal_bus_.
> +/** Double linked list of buses */
> +TAILQ_HEAD(rte_bus_list, rte_bus);
> +
> +/* Global Bus list */
> +extern struct rte_bus_list rte_bus_list;
Why the bus list is public?
> +/**
> + * A structure describing a generic bus.
> + */
> +struct rte_bus {
> + TAILQ_ENTRY(rte_bus) next; /**< Next bus object in linked list */
> + struct rte_driver_list driver_list;
> + /**< List of all drivers on bus */
> + struct rte_device_list device_list;
> + /**< List of all devices on bus */
> + const char *name; /**< Name of the bus */
> +};
I am not convinced we should link a generic bus to drivers and devices.
What do you think of having rte_pci_bus being a rte_bus and linking
with rte_pci_device and rte_pci_driver lists?
I'm thinking to something like that:
struct rte_bus {
TAILQ_ENTRY(rte_bus) next;
const char *name;
rte_bus_scan_t scan;
rte_bus_match_t match;
};
struct rte_pci_bus {
struct rte_bus bus;
struct rte_pci_driver_list pci_drivers;
struct rte_pci_device_list pci_devices;
};
> +/** Helper for Bus registration. The constructor has higher priority than
> + * PMD constructors
> + */
> +#define RTE_REGISTER_BUS(nm, bus) \
> +static void __attribute__((constructor(101), used)) businitfn_ ##nm(void) \
> +{\
> + (bus).name = RTE_STR(nm);\
> + rte_eal_bus_register(&bus); \
> +}
By removing the lists from rte_bus as suggested above, do you still need
a priority for this constructor?
> struct rte_device {
> TAILQ_ENTRY(rte_device) next; /**< Next device */
> + struct rte_bus *bus; /**< Device connected to this bus */
> const struct rte_driver *driver;/**< Associated driver */
> int numa_node; /**< NUMA node connection */
> struct rte_devargs *devargs; /**< Device user arguments */
> @@ -148,6 +149,7 @@ void rte_eal_device_remove(struct rte_device *dev);
> */
> struct rte_driver {
> TAILQ_ENTRY(rte_driver) next; /**< Next in list. */
> + struct rte_bus *bus; /**< Bus serviced by this driver */
> const char *name; /**< Driver name. */
> const char *alias; /**< Driver alias. */
> };
Do we need to know the bus associated to a driver in rte_driver?
Bus and driver are already associated in rte_device.