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 1282945B9E; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:27:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A73ED4064A; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:27:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fout-a8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a8-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.151]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FEB84029A; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:27:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from phl-compute-12.internal (phl-compute-12.phl.internal [10.202.2.52]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2FB01380256; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 05:27:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-12.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 22 Oct 2024 05:27:55 -0400 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=fm3; t=1729589275; x=1729675675; bh=hDfBgmvj2uAaSnDEfSa3p7cgti8iyIFFPWonGBK60jg=; b= S86LFnBBKG5UkIZOkeq2KPxNXv2ha4Ur2HYvGf75jn8XAFZyXH1FsLmWiKS2eRJC Wgax8IuztHiqQG3mVWJgDpNPv5Rs41EM8pCTp2Lhn0rRORIrg+5yhN4GehfQy73k Zl3PuDMxtbmjRWClKuXX8tOwGADjaEpdGeoHqhy1LUZptEcSi17DcHZZn5l0Uu04 kAz6nDml4ziqzpgeaUd65SYnRLPZRyxqxR3867I6/cKfzkQ5nL77zor5vNedNAks 1Hn0XImoJolikg7iEVsiLIniZ/Jkz5hY6mz/emTI6hE2EF0AkUBsTOXbogySHVAA srY/8D9nQCCLl5GbUB9KOg== 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-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1729589275; x= 1729675675; bh=hDfBgmvj2uAaSnDEfSa3p7cgti8iyIFFPWonGBK60jg=; b=B +9ZZFNYgKK6C1HYCZQb9TCA/csks6XEbd+mPO4zjhGH8HgKngzIUAdW1vu+JpDhj 5GB+LZ/m+tpBRjLxG0sSx9QVu4ZZMaTvAW8FWcLTexG9ichEYBNcbzYftf/1opFY zMbQR31qNPRwdvsv6CkUXRmKgqm0omwLJfAfoMov/2M8qe61dFiaWkmJmpjD3e3F /3FLLsGjR4ZEkdUENwTZmCyXt2313e3jU1UjOrcICwW/k345T04/YcCUBLeeGPbY znoZ+W2d7uinELZAfCFIiyqvZdSeugbW8+mHKQl0q2X0EPQrMBL8z0q3ivEeevVY sKf0IHezj+KoHeCg/3WFg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrvdeihedgudehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeen ucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrg hlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefftdeuhfehvdekleelveffvdelhfel hedvgedtvddvudeuieevtdfgjedvudegfeenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhm rghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepuddvpdhmohguvgepsh hmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehjvghrihhnjhgrtghosghksehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhm pdhrtghpthhtohepghgrkhhhihhlsehmrghrvhgvlhhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepug gvvhesughpughkrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepuggrvhhiugdrmhgrrhgthhgrnhgusehr vgguhhgrthdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehjvghrihhnjhesmhgrrhhvvghllhdrtghomh dprhgtphhtthhopehhkhgrlhhrrgesmhgrrhhvvghllhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehs thgvphhhvghnsehnvghtfihorhhkphhluhhmsggvrhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegsrh hutggvrdhrihgthhgrrhgushesihhnthgvlhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehhvghmrghn thdrrghgrhgrfigrlhesnhigphdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 05:27:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob , Akhil Goyal Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , Jerin Jacob , Harman Kalra , Stephen Hemminger , Bruce Richardson , Hemant Agrawal , Sachin Saxena , Ferruh Yigit , techboard@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] raw/cnxk_rvu_lf: add PMD API to get BAR addresses Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:27:51 +0200 Message-ID: <3420992.rnzMqkiUVr@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20241008105415.1026962-1-gakhil@marvell.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 22/10/2024 08:05, Akhil Goyal: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 3:00=E2=80=AFAM Thomas Monjalon > > wrote: > > > > > > 08/10/2024 20:49, Akhil Goyal: > > > > Added rte_pmd_rvu_lf_bar_get() API to get BAR address > > > > for application to configure hardware. > > > > > > In my opinion, we should not return PCI BAR addresses to an applicati= on. > > > We should make an effort to have all theses details managed in the dr= iver. > > > Giving this level of access to an app is a door we should probably no= t open. > >=20 > > I agree with this in the traditional application laying context. > > Typical layering is "driver" -> "device class like ethdev" ->applicatio= n. > >=20 > > In this case, This raw driver is a proprietary 5G PCIe device where > > the DPDK does not have a subsystem for that. So application is layered > > to have "Hardware abstraction library" and "Application" > > i.e "cnxk lf raw driver" -> "Hardware abstraction library using the > > BAR address" -> "Real Application". The real application is taking > > only to the Hardware abstraction library. > >=20 > > The rational to NOT pull "Hardware abstraction library using the BAR > > address" to DPDK are > > -Yet another 200K of driver C++ code which does not make sense to keep > > in dpdk.org > > -It can not implemenent any of the current subsystems > >=20 > > In this context, let me know what you think? >=20 > Just to add one more point. > Even if we don=E2=80=99t use this API, we can still get the BAR addresses= as David mentioned in another mail chain > rte_rawdev_info_get() -> get rte_device -> RTE_DEV_TO_PCI -> get bar addr >=20 > This we can get for each raw PCI device, not just cnxk_rvu_lf. Right? >=20 > This API is just avoiding the hassle of application to use 4 calls/indire= ctions to get the BAR address. > So having an API to improve usability should not be an issue. I'm not confortable taking this decision alone. I wonder what others think? Adding the techboard as Cc.