From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1B89ADA2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 03:36:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2016 18:36:20 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,453,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="915663410"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.66.49])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Feb 2016 18:36:19 -0800
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:36:22 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <20160216023622.GD21426@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1454831317-4542-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <1455542666-28895-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <1455542666-28895-4-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1455542666-28895-4-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] eal: introduce pci ioport api
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 02:36:22 -0000

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 02:24:25PM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> +/**
> + * A structure used to access io resources for a pci device.
> + * rte_pci_ioport is arch, os, driver specific, and should not be used outside
> + * of pci ioport api.
> + */
> +struct rte_pci_ioport {
> +	struct rte_pci_device *dev;
> +	uint64_t offset;
> +};

"offset" dosen't sound like a good name to me; espeicially when I found
code like below:

	reg = p->offset + offset;

Regarding that, maybe "base" is a better name? I don't like it too much,
though. Any better idea?

Otherwise, this patch looks good to me.

	--yliu