From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7129A04F3; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:07:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C48881D16C; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:07:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71FC1D155 for ; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 15:07:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DFFD21C1C; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 09:07:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 08 Jan 2020 09:07:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=maUrobhHivzo3SNXQtCEd727hHbqGVmS4MD7yKHBxfk=; b=auifbaG8ooH5 IxSf4DSj8inhKfp3JiAZImWnb1zYiKt7XwScA00yQAsjB4XQtgpY+YcDT9tN2S5e bgWaP8UDAOZ8XW13gtLg0e+rWsmv2twHUY3fCsGgZqz6CHukA4pp2kWBJXEN9cQB LnkhsWAveibsBbRT9bW9fUO18l/6PaI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=maUrobhHivzo3SNXQtCEd727hHbqGVmS4MD7yKHBx fk=; b=kMuBvzj6pnwn0nilbIPqmlXENeYzhuotIorv43RE6qCZ8rRiw81HnkbZH 0AiBgaxQaeGimVibgnYwHrYEEQ8HaHT2J4VfuMSa7rlqjddRCo7LKmuVJnDVTAhi Lloy9+liZ94s4THjOlb4QoHnYNWCM8pAYcioLDHBiBDZjI1gvqxwarXpFccVxFS1 YBaaX29p754KHOEvvc/PkslDDrinIJaW/qZzHyZpv1h+8kJvqSYs8ONkO7FqkT5y L8JSUFTU+7x8OFwrdCJeE6pVw/hxMNKUIyQEHybBkww14OMbdNKr1tgUrnFdHYuD vzpcy4MdKnYYlBrmLDvcn9vAlc7PA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrvdehkedgiedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9912D80060; Wed, 8 Jan 2020 09:07:52 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: David Marchand , Ferruh Yigit , Laurent Hardy Cc: dev , Olivier Matz , Andrew Rybchenko Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 15:07:51 +0100 Message-ID: <1709381.atdPhlSkOF@xps> In-Reply-To: <9e05c21a-dfa9-4ac8-0937-38394b25dac0@6wind.com> References: <20200107145637.8922-1-laurent.hardy@6wind.com> <1825898.usQuhbGJ8B@xps> <9e05c21a-dfa9-4ac8-0937-38394b25dac0@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] librte_ethdev: extend dpdk api led control to query capability X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 08/01/2020 14:58, Laurent Hardy: > About the 'is_supported()' versions of APIs, in the current patch I > factorize > the check on dev ops on and off availability in a same function named > "led_ctrl_capable" but I can rename it if required. > > Just in this specific case I don't dissociate on and off capability, as > being > able to set the led off without a way to set it on again sounds a bit > unusual :) > > > The other alternatives are in rte_eth_dev_info and dev_flags. Basically we just need to decide whether we prefer a new function or a new flag. Until now, capabilities were given in flags. Why a function here?