From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <yliu@fridaylinux.org> Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99FA02904 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:43:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D1E224E0; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:43:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:43:43 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fridaylinux.org; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=KgFFMf+IOEWriNUyY tZWXgcdYl5m1dh71GWpumPq2y8=; b=LD/6LVpVon9WLDGPHAP3r9ieFOgw1ig7/ aDWax6S0dzolDTuNC9bp/a3AbMkvNHwhRBbv1hUi6c1nbTsGpX3ZQQoJdyIxidcL rUX8VqgamvFdO6R52T5wy0AwnMQL24E8ey/DLBntR01H1fuk+nQ3LRzubFqJFJ0z ezcqTP1TAygqyqFlBKyaGeGhMfhzAEVLx216xG9kVT6xvXXRFvaCmbwDXZUw6t4u DdsC5f4nJHeTKGauXHdosLlLeLAZo01pdJ5J9q49QVUb3hEiL29ESE+KurXS/7/R Nfw/tX2ygYme8KOQThcs4Smyo1jAFmlchccLTfXpb4NDanzhAZmpw== 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=KgFFMf +IOEWriNUyYtZWXgcdYl5m1dh71GWpumPq2y8=; b=OLrZSJT8vkECthb+E1uhjp s0M6dla74aOMOpDuAt0K/xgfCbyMu78H0MPdF0yR74KVDVnL/dzZBZzJ0cNDSrSq nQIvAry0M5TGoSEXnQ+sTC+86fHm/Yo5s3HTDm2Rf5tQjNlP+cqVry9VLDJoQMrb TUmaj90OHg/kAME2sex99JoH7CTZ3mK1OOzQnwELJFfGQD5x0X9oYIIJJk8aNNVc 2ePBYYBboggaEGR0GIvbhkofOu0j/CLC4+35DYdJ0+5asvkW+AZC6PZq9XW8iuyU 28IHpxT76Mbtms+UQicidQl5lFerynKxTntPRl/qKiAnVLNy5moh2MMsujTm+yRA == X-ME-Sender: <xms:HitoWu2y4eY07ppK44OGiTksdYnjESoNIMmGSAeNRLxqoFgGrcf3ng> Received: from yliu-mob (unknown [115.150.27.206]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id F25937E1BE; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 01:43:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 14:43:39 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu <yliu@fridaylinux.org> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180124064339.GT29540@yliu-mob> References: <1516114218-21501-1-git-send-email-yliu@fridaylinux.org> <20180118094623.gu5ahrfd75b5gcct@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> <20180123124602.GS29540@yliu-mob> <17059484.9s6tGoQGou@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <17059484.9s6tGoQGou@xps> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: document the new devargs syntax X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 06:43:44 -0000 On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 03:29:34PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 23/01/2018 13:46, Yuanhan Liu: > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:46:23AM +0100, Gaëtan Rivet wrote: > > > 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? > > > > Let's take port addition in OVS-DPDK as an example. It happens in 2 > > steps: > > - port lookup (if port is already probed) > > - dev attachment (if lookup fails) > > > > And also let's assume we need probe a ConnectX-3 port. Note that for > > ConnectX-3, there are 2 ports sharing the same PCI addr. Thus, PCI > > BDF is not enough. And let's assume we use another extra property > > "port". > > > > If the proposal described in this patch is being used, the devarg > > would look like following: > > > > bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0/driver=mlx4,mlx4_arg_A=val,... > > > > Then "bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0" will be used for lookup, > > It means we are looking for a port with PCI BDF == 04:00.0 AND > > port == 0 (the first port of the 2 ports). > > > > Note that in my proposal the driver category is not intended for lookup. > > If any properties needed be looked in the driver category, they would > > probably need be elevated to the class category. > > It is not my thought. > I think we should be able to use bus, class and driver properties for lookup. > We can imagine doing a lookup on a driver specific id, which is not > candidate to elevation to the class category. > > > If port not found, then the whole string will be used for dev attachment. > > It means we are attaching a port with PCI BDF == 04.00.0 AND > > port == 0 (the 2nd port will not be attached). > > > > > > And here is how the devargs would look like if "matching;settings" is > > being used: > > > > bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0;bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0/driver=mlx4,mlx4_arg_A=val,... > > > > The part before ";" will be used for lookup and the later part will be > > used for attachment. It should work. It just looks redundant. > > It does not have to be redundant. > It can be: > bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0;driver=mlx4,mlx4_arg1=settings1,... I knew you would make such reply :) Then there is a contradiction. According your suggestion, the "port=0" belongs to the matching section, but it also has to be used in the settings section. > Another example, setting the MAC address: > bus=pci,id=04:00.0/class=eth,port=0;class=eth,mac=00:11:22:33:44:55 What's the scenario it will be used? And who is going to parse it? --yliu