DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: zr@semihalf.com
Cc: remy.horton@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] ethdev: add callback to get register size in bytes
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 10:53:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <12994980.C5dFrG15Qg@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464767771-19159-1-git-send-email-zr@semihalf.com>

Hi Zyta,

2016-06-01 09:56, zr@semihalf.com:
> rte_eth_dev_get_reg_length and rte_eth_dev_get_reg callbacks
> do not provide register size to the app in any way. It is
> needed to allocate proper number of bytes before retrieving
> registers content with rte_eth_dev_get_reg.

Yes, register size is needed.
And I think it makes sense to register it in the struct rte_dev_reg_info.
We already have a length field, so we could just add a width field.

> @@ -1455,6 +1458,8 @@ struct eth_dev_ops {
>  
>  	eth_get_reg_length_t get_reg_length;
>  	/**< Get # of registers */
> +	eth_get_reg_width_t get_reg_width;
> +	/**< Get # of bytes in register */
>  	eth_get_reg_t get_reg;
>  	/**< Get registers */

I am not sure it is a good practice to add a new function for each
parameter of a request.
I would prefer having only one function rte_eth_dev_get_regs()
which returns length and width if data is NULL.
The first call is a parameter request before buffer allocation,
and the second call fills the buffer.

We can deprecate the old API and introduce this new one.

Opinions?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-06-08  8:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-01  7:56 zr
2016-06-01  7:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] examples/ethtool: get reg width to allocate memory zr
2016-06-07  9:52   ` Remy Horton
2016-06-07  9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] ethdev: add callback to get register size in bytes Remy Horton
2016-06-08  8:53 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-06-12 14:51   ` Zyta Szpak
2016-06-13 15:51     ` Remy Horton
2016-06-17 10:20       ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-06-21  9:55         ` Zyta Szpak
2016-06-22  8:19           ` Zyta Szpak
2016-06-22  8:26             ` Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=12994980.C5dFrG15Qg@xps13 \
    --to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=remy.horton@intel.com \
    --cc=zr@semihalf.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).