From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2716D6AE0 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 15:27:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 06:27:46 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,324,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="178324330" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.123]) ([10.237.220.123]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 06:27:46 -0700 To: Kamil Rytarowski , dev@dpdk.org References: <1472230448-17490-1-git-send-email-krytarowski@caviumnetworks.com> <1475237154-25388-1-git-send-email-krytarowski@caviumnetworks.com> <1475237154-25388-15-git-send-email-krytarowski@caviumnetworks.com> <90a90355-4f83-1def-081b-070924dd60d0@intel.com> <9d573206-79c8-b82f-e47f-f8b300112123@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: maciej.czekaj@caviumnetworks.com, zyta.szpak@semihalf.com, slawomir.rosek@semihalf.com, rad@semihalf.com, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, john.mcnamara@intel.com, Kamil Rytarowski From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <95a9ad76-5d2c-d174-7069-e116733ff4af@intel.com> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 14:27:44 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9d573206-79c8-b82f-e47f-f8b300112123@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 14/15] ethdev: Support VFs on the different PCI domains X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:27:48 -0000 On 10/10/2016 2:01 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: > > > W dniu 10.10.2016 o 12:19, Ferruh Yigit pisze: >> Hi Kamil, >> >> On 9/30/2016 1:05 PM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote: >>> It's possible to have the same numbers for bus, device id and function, >>> therefore we need to differentiate on domain. >>> >>> This enables DPDK with multiple VFs on ThunderX 2-socket hardware. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Maciej Czekaj >>> Signed-off-by: Kamil Rytarowski >>> Signed-off-by: Zyta Szpak >>> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Rosek >>> Signed-off-by: Radoslaw Biernacki >>> Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob >>> --- >>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c >>> index 382c959..01d5fb0 100644 >>> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c >>> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c >>> @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_create_unique_device_name(char *name, size_t size, >>> { >>> int ret; >>> >>> - ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d.%d", >>> + ret = snprintf(name, size, "%d:%d:%d.%d", pci_dev->addr.domain, >>> pci_dev->addr.bus, pci_dev->addr.devid, >>> pci_dev->addr.function); >>> if (ret < 0) >>> >> Is it possible to separate this patch from patchset, this is a ethdev >> patch and it seems not directly related to the rest of the patchset? >> >> Thanks, >> ferruh > > This patch is directly related with secondary queue set support on > ThunderX, but it can be skipped in this chain of patches and applied as > a standalone diff. > > Is disabling this one on patch work sufficient? Of course unless there > are no more comments to produce v3 of the original patch chain "Add > support for secondary queue set in nicvf thunderx driver". I think it is sufficient, at least I don't have any more comment for rest of the patchset and it looks good to me. > > Should I resubmit it as a new standalone patch? Can you please resubmit just this one patch, so it can be properly reviewed. Thanks, ferruh