From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3AF46071; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:39:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30E394025F; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:39:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 696B5400EF for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:39:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from phl-compute-11.internal (phl-compute-11.phl.internal [10.202.2.51]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E947C1380298; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 07:39:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-11.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 14 Jan 2025 07:39:53 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1736858393; x=1736944793; bh=bzBxqKQlnFBj0lBrkNu7kFcEfijeDs9CNThZLKl63qk=; b= n7xSfJPs4/hg88v4vdvvv+YVePw+UxEIGidjMsIVH9qjrf8lSe3cYzqb7Vp0fkJe YJnEghZzfej7blriSV8ibJ9ulgq+b8ilVLihh4Zp+BUhNvB3AeNuCzzxF0DlYxDJ Yq5T/qVbJmbAb1JEPN00Be34fvF1kV3YaS/jOJCikK2t5KrT9lRD2fhipZ/OSuwG R4BOlyRHGMPtoUYx1MVjN1kJ9CM+j0OAn+kujqEnS0sl4guUe5+uBBisIY8GUpzC /9jn4QnYlS3M7RnbwjZlI5dg/n7kK3BVMqb+azldv2u3wLYUCNWIslvetDotatAy ZP7CI4OPbNgoR8IYObjQ+Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1736858393; x= 1736944793; bh=bzBxqKQlnFBj0lBrkNu7kFcEfijeDs9CNThZLKl63qk=; b=i 9Age0T40+88jxvEM7P47yL6bYQEviy+9Or1vghZms8JDiiHtjLv1HY1pyVsPQtot AGJbot8VTgZtoA6jpukBoqkVa6/kHxiUrUONQcANNJHPnja2sfPSsKLnmpw0UDGP yFjAsVNh/3UyEF0bEg9Omutty8LppA2IWpUsdVlbOhum8Jo1dEbfEM33YjdlRFWk zbkUvNtfypi1NVYij67sXO590vpX7YXpA+F3szZKJALBlPpUDGHwciMbaqj1NdIe Yoxy2bjo/5PM+P2lNIB2OmAQWroRQRI5NhMrzFWZ1ZltAiFbOKA8MmYT6zEi1wzq dkf94NqINFqxHRvHE8bQQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefuddrudehiedggedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeen ucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrg hlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeegtddtleejjeegffekkeektdejvedt heevtdekiedvueeuvdeiuddvleevjeeujeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurf grrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtpdhn sggprhgtphhtthhopedujedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtoheplhhihh huihhsohhngheshhhurgifvghirdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepuggvvhesughpughkrdho rhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepshhtvghphhgvnhesnhgvthifohhrkhhplhhumhgsvghrrdhorh hgpdhrtghpthhtohepfhgvrhhruhhhrdihihhgihhtsegrmhgurdgtohhmpdhrtghpthht oheprghjihhtrdhkhhgrphgrrhguvgessghrohgruggtohhmrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoh epshhomhhnrghthhdrkhhothhurhessghrohgruggtohhmrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohep phhrrghvvggvnhdrshhhvghtthihsehinhhtvghlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheprghnug hrvgifrdgsohihvghrsegrmhgurdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepughsohhsnhhofihskhhi sehnvhhiughirgdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 07:39:50 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "lihuisong (C)" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, ferruh.yigit@amd.com, Ajit Khaparde , Somnath Kotur , Praveen Shetty , Andrew Boyer , Dariusz Sosnowski , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Bing Zhao , Ori Kam , Suanming Mou , Matan Azrad , Chaoyong He , Andrew Rybchenko , fengchengwen@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] ethdev: fix skip valid port in probing callback Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:39:48 +0100 Message-ID: <2239813.NgBsaNRSFp@thomas> In-Reply-To: <93d2853a-ef15-5be6-5ef4-51ebd6b9b3ca@huawei.com> References: <20250113025521.32703-1-lihuisong@huawei.com> <2489922.jE0xQCEvom@thomas> <93d2853a-ef15-5be6-5ef4-51ebd6b9b3ca@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 14/01/2025 13:13, lihuisong (C): > =E5=9C=A8 2025/1/14 19:13, Thomas Monjalon =E5=86=99=E9=81=93: > > As explained above, we should not do allow much API from RTE_ETH_EVENT_= NEW. > > rte_eth_dev_socket_id() is reasonnable. > > Functions rte_eth_dev_owner_*() are fine. > > Others functions should be called only after probing. >=20 > All right, will fix it in new patch set. > And I'll also add these comments like above you said for RTE_ETH_EVENT_NE= W. Thank you