From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com (mail-pa0-f45.google.com [209.85.220.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53780B481 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:38:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by pabrd3 with SMTP id rd3so1005399pab.1 for ; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 04:38:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Q9JDeU4ibfTxWW6vYLqvtgeQcsByir7XySygcytfSW8=; b=Odw3U8ct/n6QsUdrtZJZsC9c1y6dmSAo2Wpvm21HZsB/yF4646wSCYvqe28LXUHzpM Atio7LU4LjPNLLSTKCyT6lQbyMlno6YuzoVSflQ/3aas7Uo0MsKcp/yta5VALq/cbFbW AGBT/8FBZ6E87OyJTF323rgETFH5cs0DuyF9Aa78aRUkLrN2xtov9+cZ2adxY/pAld88 ybgxiAptYXmougYbELPxxCyQmqhhXp7tRedy9/4GUZ53e2fwjfbfGLFTLSba1ftvT2VI dZxQPhWQwvpcwZ0jfRTM3TjN4VejCBbmDppOazrkFJuGXCkGKWVNyUaSAjo7i+ZhB+BT f8JA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmUdBq6Dmc+k5jqEYSZrCrWmejrzUhvxtINwjbW31kznw5iUXgR8qc3gEhxUCz/WFgqyrFX X-Received: by 10.68.239.69 with SMTP id vq5mr57719463pbc.96.1424263137582; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 04:38:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.16.129.101] (napt.igel.co.jp. [219.106.231.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qy3sm20610037pbc.4.2015.02.18.04.38.55 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Feb 2015 04:38:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54E487DE.7050207@igel.co.jp> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:38:54 +0900 From: Tetsuya Mukawa User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Richardson References: <1423470639-15744-2-git-send-email-mukawa@igel.co.jp> <54E3F0F0.1030102@igel.co.jp> <54E42CCD.6020900@igel.co.jp> <3870939.2syNine7YF@xps13> <20150218100328.GB14728@bricha3-MOBL3> <54E4703E.1010904@igel.co.jp> <20150218122311.GA5960@bricha3-MOBL3> In-Reply-To: <20150218122311.GA5960@bricha3-MOBL3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Neil Horman Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 03/14] eal/pci, ethdev: Remove assumption that port will not be detached 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: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:38:58 -0000 On 2015/02/18 21:23, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 07:58:06PM +0900, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote: >> On 2015/02/18 19:03, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:57:25AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>> 2015-02-18 15:10, Tetsuya Mukawa: >>>>> On 2015/02/18 10:54, Tetsuya Mukawa wrote: >>>>>> On 2015/02/18 9:31, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>> 2015-02-17 15:14, Tetsuya Mukawa: >>>>>>>> On 2015/02/17 9:36, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>>>>>>>> 2015-02-16 13:14, Tetsuya Mukawa: >>>>>>>>> Is uint8_t sill a good size for hotpluggable virtual device ids= ? >>>>>>>> I am not sure it's enough, but uint8_t is widely used in "rte_et= hdev.c" >>>>>>>> as port id. >>>>>>>> If someone reports it doesn't enough, I guess it will be the tim= e to >>>>>>>> write a patch to change all uint_8 in one patch. >>>>>>> It's a big ABI breakage. So if we feel it's going to be required,= >>>>>>> it's better to do it now in 2.0 release I think. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any opinion? >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Thomas, >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with it. >>>>>> I will add an one more patch to change uint8_t to uint16_t. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Tetsuya >>>>>> >>>>> Hi Thomas, >>>>> >>>>> Could I make sure. >>>>> After changing uint8_t to uint16_t in "rte_ethdev.[ch]", must I als= o >>>>> need to change other applications and libraries that call ethdev AP= Is? >>>>> If so, I would not finish it by 23rd. >>>>> >>>>> I've counted how many lines call ethdev APIs that are related to po= rt_id. >>>>> Could you please check an attached file? >>>>> It's over 1200 lines. Probably to fix one of caller, I will need t= o >>>>> check how port_id is used, and fix more related lines. So probably >>>>> thousands lines may need to be fixed. >>>>> >>>>> When is deadline for fixing this changing? >>>>> Also, if you have a good idea to fix it easier, could you please le= t me >>>>> know? >>>> It was an open question. >>>> If everybody is fine with 255 ports maximum, let's keep it as is. >>>> >>> I think we are probably ok for now (and forseeable future) with 255 m= ax. >>> >>> However, if we did change it, I agree that in 2.0 is a very good time= to do so. >>> Since we are expanding the field, rather than shrinking it, I don't s= ee why we >>> can't just make the change at the ethdev level (and in libs API) in 2= =2E0 and then in >>> later releases (e.g. 2.1) update the apps and examples to match. That= way the >>> ABI stays the same from 2.0 onwards, and we don't have a huge amount = of churn >>> changing it everywhere late in the 2.0 release cycle. >> Hi Bruce, >> >> Could you please check my RFC patch I will send soon? >> I wrote the patch like below. >> >> 1. Copy header file like below. >> $ cp lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_interna= l.h >> 2. Change "rte_ethdev.c" to include "rte_ethdev_internal.h" >> 3. Change type of port id in "rte_ethdev.c" and "rte_ethdev_internal.h= ". >> >> If the patch is OK, I wll send it with hotplug patches. >> >> Thanks, >> Tetsuya >> >> > Why the new ethdev internal file?=20 I guess some libraries that include "rte_ethdev.h". To compile these libraries, I thought such a header was needed. But, it seems it's not the time to change type of port_id. I appreciate for your checking. Tetsuya