Re: [PATCH] doc: announce transition to vDPA port close function

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

12/07/2022 14:26, Thomas Monjalon:
> 12/07/2022 11:16, Maxime Coquelin:
> > 
> > On 5/18/21 09:34, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > There is a layer violation in the vDPA API which encourages to destroy
> > > a full device with rte_dev_remove() instead of just closing the port.
> > > The plan is to introduce a new function in 21.08, promote in 21.11,
> > > and deprecate rte_vdpa_get_rte_device() in 21.11.
> [...]
> > > +* vdpa: The vDPA API should not try to manipulate or export
> > > +  any ``rte_device`` object, which belongs to the bus layer.
> > > +  The function ``rte_vdpa_get_rte_device()`` will be deprecated in 21.11,
> > > +  when its usage will be replaced with a function ``rte_vdpa_close()``.
> > > +  The new function should enter in 21.08 and get promoted to stable in 21.11.
> > > +  A port close function will allow to close a single port without destroying
> > > +  the rest of the device.
> > 
> > Maybe there was some changes since you posted the announce, but I don't
> > see why rte_vdpa_close() would be needed. It seems the only user of
> > rte_vdpa_get_rte_device() is the internal vDPA example, and it only use
> > it to get and print the device name.
> 
> You're right, it was an oversight.
> So we need only to get the rte_device name.
> 
> I propose to replace
> 	struct rte_device *rte_vdpa_get_rte_device(struct rte_vdpa_device *vdpa_dev);
> with
> 	const char *rte_vdpa_get_name(void);

sorry, I missed a parameter :)
It would be:
	const char *rte_vdpa_get_name(struct rte_vdpa_device *vdpa_dev);

Or do you prefer "rte_vdpa_get_device_name"?