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 B7F4A1B348 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 15:08:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659E920A7B; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:08:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:08:03 -0500 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; s=mesmtp; bh=biWFFX04s6fo+/NAOqps6RrZAA O1g28g9D5byvCCfrY=; b=RjLQIl34dNWzCj92b/OzpdUgsTSU4YIrW6DmUap2iW xQJ60uPv5xW7A3cdN3J8SLXDJ9oMtK4zFpYbN2D13QT2aBFKDHhYtnpdlFIK0W2T cwHV2tRz+KhnGhO5IcOP6Gw+8SBIUjB58WwmHcOBnGRryqEecC5UyhZhDxfqWeyQ E= 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; s=fm1; bh=biWFFX 04s6fo+/NAOqps6RrZAAO1g28g9D5byvCCfrY=; b=gvbdLHlRelwU+B0wSOYnAY liQ7gJ81TeR3PVv/POd0u0ME5fWBHPWYe6mte8P2lg7miK3UIhhHMTJgsp96T18O za8fe+N+/Oyiq9QywGWFsfYa3V23TRVIEkAUBrHVlQme9mSOXJpjJwev87FlQsdz a+M6fnD+Us7njf5JFFA5jJXwA7uKvdv3+E5WTQgqPUf4jsHTZVwRTYCUxtdYvjdu GUe2FbR4bYMzRgHkuTHDyp4fIts7KbC+zBY2bCquABMZi04p945SOb9QXu6Ey1NX wmys4MKoLaqXq7ODjGmGCz0niKTQ4yhD2LS7At4xX95wSrvdcxdLC8HXUt8oP6RA == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1412924235; Fri, 19 Jan 2018 09:08:03 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Neil Horman Cc: Matan Azrad , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Gaetan Rivet , "Wu, Jingjing" , dev@dpdk.org, "Richardson, Bruce" Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 15:07:28 +0100 Message-ID: <4383328.LcqRCZq5Jg@xps> In-Reply-To: <20180119135753.GD5342@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> References: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772588627DE30@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180119135753.GD5342@hmswarspite.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/6] ethdev: add port ownership 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, 19 Jan 2018 14:08:04 -0000 19/01/2018 14:57, Neil Horman: > > > I specifically pointed that out above. There is no reason an owernship record > > > couldn't be added to the rte_eth_dev structure. > > > > Sorry, don't understand why. > > > Because, thats the resource your trying to protect, and the object you want to > identify ownership of, no? No The rte_eth_dev structure is the port representation in the process. The rte_eth_dev_data structure is the port represenation across multi-process. The ownership must be in rte_eth_dev_data to cover multi-process protection.