From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: Clarification for eth_driver changes
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:03:36 +0100
Message-ID: <26890399.yRKBLeyzpS@xps13>
References: <b81216f4-bb8e-81ec-f727-168fff11f0dd@nxp.com>
 <CAP4Qi3_abM_c72itz7v-YXLW-F3E1Tk2Tuy8uZ5_=7Zk_kdFeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
 David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
To: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D22A47CD
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 09:03:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id f82so14418062wmf.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:03:38 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAP4Qi3_abM_c72itz7v-YXLW-F3E1Tk2Tuy8uZ5_=7Zk_kdFeQ@mail.gmail.com>
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>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-11-10 15:51, Jianbo Liu:
> On 10 November 2016 at 15:26, Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> wrote:
> > This is what the current outline of eth_driver is:
> >
> > +------------------------+
> > | eth_driver             |
> > | +---------------------+|
> > | | rte_pci_driver      ||
> > | | +------------------+||
> > | | | rte_driver       |||
> > | | |  name[]          |||
> > | | |  ...             |||
> > | | +------------------+||
> > | |  .probe             ||
> > | |  .remove            ||
> > | |  ...                ||
> > | +---------------------+|
> > |  .eth_dev_init         |
> > |  .eth_dev_uninit       |
> > +------------------------+
> >
> > This is what I was thinking:
> >
> > +---------------------+        +----------------------+
> > | rte_pci_driver      |        |eth_driver            |
> > | +------------------+|       _|_struct rte_driver *p |
> > | | rte_driver       <-------/ | .eth_dev_init        |
> > | |  ...             ||        | .eth_dev_uninit      |
> > | |  name            ||        +----------------------+
> > | |  <more>          ||
> > | +------------------+|
> > |  <PCI specific info>|
> > +---------------------+
> >
> > ::Impact::
> > Various drivers use the rte_pci_driver embedded in the eth_driver object for
> > device initialization.
> >  == They assume that rte_pci_driver is directly embedded and hence simply
> > dereference.
> >  == e.g. eth_igb_dev_init() in drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c file
> >
> > With the above change, such drivers would have to access rte_driver and then
> > perform container_of to obtain their respective rte_xxx_driver.
> >  == this would be useful in case there is a non-PCI driver
> >
> > ::Problem::
> > I am not sure of reason as to why eth_driver embedded rte_pci_driver in
> > first place - other than a convenient way to define it before PCI driver
> > registration.
> >
> > As all the existing PMDs are impacted - am I missing something here in
> > making the above change?
> >
> 
> How do you know eth_driver->p is pointing to a rte_pci_driver or rte_soc_driver?
> Maybe you need to add a type/flag in rte_driver.

Why do you need any bus information at ethdev level?