From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <viktorin@rehivetech.com>
Received: from wes1-so2.wedos.net (wes1-so2.wedos.net [46.28.106.16])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42D242A5B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:27:56 +0100 (CET)
Received: from pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz (pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz
 [147.229.13.147])
 by wes1-so2.wedos.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3q0gND0C72z1rl;
 Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:27:56 +0100 (CET)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:29:18 +0100
From: Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20160210132918.281ef29f@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
In-Reply-To: <CALwxeUvUVSXafp_ykUcjftq=4WNUeasXrcmbaiWM8g9+N6EKng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1454076516-21591-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <1454076516-21591-4-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <20160209180555.3ad379cf@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
 <CALwxeUs8zro1cM2zFVRmmEViwY8P=+s8L_6TOCOqf=w-ohscOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALwxeUuqiib7_KjNjvP9e=qGgWPyuZa7ZDXOOL=VHq4i=x8usQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160210112028.7d1004a0@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
 <CALwxeUvUVSXafp_ykUcjftq=4WNUeasXrcmbaiWM8g9+N6EKng@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: RehiveTech
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/9] drivers: no more pdev drivers
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:27:56 -0000

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:38:20 +0100
David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:27:14 +0100
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com> wrote:  
> >> #define RTE_EAL_PCI_REGISTER(name, d)\
> >> void pciinitfn_ ##name(void);\
> >> void __attribute__((constructor, used)) pciinitfn_ ##name(void)\
> >> {\
> >>         rte_eal_pci_register(d);\  
> >
> > I meant
> >         rte_eal_pci_register(&(d)->pci_drv);\
> >
> > Perhaps, my assumption that a PCI driver is always referred as pci_drv is wrong...  
> 
> Well, I suppose we will always have a pci driver embedded in some
> other internal pmd structure.
> So we can always expect it to be called pci_drv ...
> 
> Btw, for drivers like mlx or virtio that need to do some more stuff in
> their constructor (the iopl stuff for virtio is the most interesting
> case, since the pci register happens only if iopl succeeded), we might
> need some RTE_MODULE_INIT for those.
> 
> But in such a case, I think having RTE_MODULE_INIT in all pmds would
> make more sense, and RTE_EAL_PCI_REGISTER looks unneeded ?
> 

The Linux Kernel solves this by allowing both ways. You can do it by
hand and for most cases you can use just a simple oneliner.

So, we can have the RTE_(EAL_)MODULE_INIT for the general case. And then
eg. RTE_EAL_PCI_MODULE_INIT that makes the most common glue code to
register a single driver and who finally calls the RTE_EAL_MODULE_INIT.

Regards
Jan