DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus scanning to allowed devices
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 06:06:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CH2PR18MB32708FA362BBC28F4A348B57B4FE0@CH2PR18MB3270.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR18MB32707D5335A01EBFC1A1ED68B4EB0@CH2PR18MB3270.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

Hello Stephen,

Please provide ack on below change if there is no concern so that it can be accepted on 20.05.

Regards
Sunil Kumar Kori

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sunil Kumar Kori
>Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2020 2:00 PM
>To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Jerin Jacob
>Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus scanning to
>allowed devices
>
>Hello All,
>
>Is there any thought on this ? Otherwise it can be merged.
>
>Regards
>Sunil Kumar Kori
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Sunil Kumar Kori
>>Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 2:13 PM
>>To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Jerin Jacob
>>Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>
>>Subject: FW: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus
>>scanning to allowed devices
>>
>>Hello Stephen,
>>
>>Can you please look into this patch or provide your thought in this ?
>>So that it can be merged within 20.02 release.
>>
>>Regards
>>Sunil Kumar Kori
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
>>Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2020 2:09 PM
>>To: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>; Stephen Hemminger
>><stephen@networkplumber.org>
>>Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>>Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus
>>scanning to allowed devices
>>
>>Hello Stephen,
>>Any suggestions ?
>>
>>Regards
>>Sunil Kumar Kori
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Sunil Kumar Kori
>>>Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 4:30 PM
>>>To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>>>Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>>>Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus
>>>scanning to allowed devices
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Sunil Kumar Kori
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>>>>Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 9:43 PM
>>>>To: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
>>>>Cc: dev@dpdk.org
>>>>Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus
>>>>scanning to allowed devices
>>>>
>>>>External Email
>>>>
>>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>-
>>>>> 			/* Create dummy pci device to get devargs */
>>>>> +			dummy_dev.addr.domain =
>>>>matches[i].pc_sel.pc_domain;
>>>>> +			dummy_dev.addr.bus = matches[i].pc_sel.pc_bus;
>>>>> +			dummy_dev.addr.devid = matches[i].pc_sel.pc_dev;
>>>>> +			dummy_dev.addr.function =
>>>>matches[i].pc_sel.pc_func;
>>>>> +			dummy_dev.device.devargs =
>>>>> +
>>>>	pci_devargs_lookup(&dummy_dev);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +			/* Check that device should be ignored or not  */
>>>>> +			if (pci_ignore_device(&dummy_dev))
>>>>> +				continue;
>>>>
>>>>It seems that you are creating dummy_dev as an alternative to passing
>>>>just the PCI bus/device/function. Wouldn't be easier to just use BDF
>>>>instead. Dummy arguments on the stack can lead to more corner cases
>>>>in the future if device subsystem changes.
>>>Agreed and initially I have implemented using BDF only instead of
>>>using dummy device.
>>>But using that approach, I was not able to use existing APIs to get
>>>devargs and ignore device.
>>>I had to write almost same functions to solve the purpose. So just to
>>>avoid having replica of same code, I followed this approach. Please suggest.
>>>>
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * Get the devargs of a PCI device.
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * @param pci_dev
>>>>> + *	PCI device to be validated
>>>>> + * @return
>>>>> + *	devargs on succes, NULL otherwise
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +struct rte_devargs *pci_devargs_lookup(struct rte_pci_device
>>>>> +*pci_dev);
>>>>
>>>>Must be marked experimental (or internal).
>>>>The pci_device should be marked const.
>>>Okay but If I go with BDF one then this change is not required anyway.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/**
>>>>> + * Validate whether a pci device should be ignored or not.
>>>>> + *
>>>>> + * @param pci_dev
>>>>> + *	PCI device to be validated
>>>>> + * @return
>>>>> + *	1 if device is to be ignored, 0 otherwise
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +bool pci_ignore_device(const struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev);
>>>>
>>>>ditto
>>>ditto

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-09  6:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-16  7:55 [dpdk-dev] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2019-12-16 16:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-12-17 11:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-01-21  8:39     ` Sunil Kumar Kori
     [not found]       ` <MN2PR18MB327936807460D9F2AE4894F3B40F0@MN2PR18MB3279.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
2020-02-27  8:30         ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-03-09  6:06           ` Sunil Kumar Kori [this message]
2020-04-06  9:32             ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-06 13:21               ` David Marchand
2020-04-07  9:21                 ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-07  9:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/1] bus/pci: optimise scanning with whitelist/blacklist Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17  8:30   ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17  8:44   ` David Marchand
2020-04-17 11:15     ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17 13:25       ` David Marchand
2020-04-17 15:12         ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17 15:35           ` David Marchand
2020-04-17 16:00             ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-20  6:59               ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-20  6:55   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-21 15:18     ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-22  6:17       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-22  9:38         ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-23  7:47           ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-27 18:43     ` [dpdk-dev] " Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-28 13:52       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 11:39     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 12:40       ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 21:00       ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-02  7:20         ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-02  7:42       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-02 11:27         ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-04 14:17         ` David Marchand
2020-05-05  5:57           ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-06 12:54           ` [dpdk-dev] " David Marchand
2020-05-11 14:59         ` David Marchand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CH2PR18MB32708FA362BBC28F4A348B57B4FE0@CH2PR18MB3270.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=skori@marvell.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git