From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5457CB6 for ; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:19:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C36215FA; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:19:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:19:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; 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:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=gaFNcp13g0L2hN+ 7EWDvxV+vEoQOIt0hN+nne/siUYI=; b=JBdLEReH8iZyqica8TrFlerz4NJpNjt O9IaoD5W1roIsfT8QZplhHwhwr1LcZZSqnEOaF5QPqyIcPdEMZQuFwd4MemZ5Var o4ftAjhKYYtRbtCAAusNFLCAzq67+vbmgQv2SiwoIG2BUL79EAv0nT5w65ELnwOf 60tY45K+r8V0= 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:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=gaFNcp13g0L2hN+7EWDvxV+vEoQOIt0hN+nne/siUYI=; b=cvjxwODt TYf7iRWAEoxgGCDOSNnouL6VHKHjn2QHXQDMbR3zTApLTfObuKvHPxlfva3w3rxa TsDIyGqD9NEl/tdq2CAiulpKELQd6EMBHFjVik97FB5clqJ+kY5KohpEvpLBQmdw mg/n8Oq5pldQDkVGOE/zOfjvETn1R/1DoMCtuxzTJcxuunI+Vw2V1OHEoee4gzk5 XziUQvgtESktFjTSZMJXK7Qq3Q5w+/RoowUohM55JZEl8a77fZA0pX4CcTd1Hx8N /rCl6TjZaRCWEAkBqUg49bo2ECmWIZShVwJx90xTyDNQcaVi/XTka6+DebXWzCWm Hn7Xv5gxFi3MXA== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: BBPeiQyw1dcbibNj0P22whlTX527ATalWsP3rn9992aT 1506089967 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C31D97E7C6; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:19:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Shreyansh Jain Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "ferruh.yigit@intel.com" , Hemant Agrawal Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:19:27 +0200 Message-ID: <2005912.TG1KxgVreU@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20170823141213.25476-1-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <1563275.iJklTzZNDB@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 00/41] Introduce NXP DPAA Bus, Mempool and PMD X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:19:28 -0000 22/09/2017 16:00, Shreyansh Jain: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > At the beginning of fslmc work, I had understood that every NXP SoC were > > connecting components with the same principle which we could call the > > "Freescale bus". > > Then you came with this bus named bus/fslmc, not bus/dpaa2. > > Now I am confused. What is the exact scope of fslmc? Is it just DPAA2? > > My memory is poor. I will have to look through the old emails what happened - but I recall there was a discussion in initial phases about the naming. "fslmc" came out as a name that is what is the real name of the DPAA2 bus. There was initial a confusion if name of bus in Linux Kernel should match or not - but, we realized that bus is *not* device and device name is "dpaa2". > > As for whether fslmc would cover multiple SoC - that is still true. There are multiple SoCs within the DPAA2 umbrella. LS20XX, LS108X series and some more - all of which use the FSLMC bus (DPAA2 architecture, on FSLMC bus, having 'dpaa2' devices). > > There is another architecture, an old one, which are still popular. This is platform type bus which is aptly named 'dpaa' - and here the confusion of bus name and device doesn't appear. (DPAA bus, using DPAA architecture, exposing 'dpaa' devices). > > Exact scope of FSLMC is just DPAA2 architecture based SoCs. There are many here with new coming up. > Exact scope of DPAA bus is just DPAA architecture based SoCs. There are many here. > > Does this clear your doubt to some extent? Yes it is a lot clearer! Thanks Now that I better understand, I think flsmc bus should have been named dpaa2 bus. Is it too late?