From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rte_ethdev: add link support flag Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 11:27:01 +0200 Message-ID: <1466647.TRuQXWIUSI@xps13> References: <20140619151238.28b9bbea@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <4709584.nAXykbU3l6@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4709584.nAXykbU3l6@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" Hi Stephen, I had no answer to this comment. Please check. 2014-06-20 15:06, Thomas Monjalon: > 2014-06-19 15:12, Stephen Hemminger: > > Only some devices support the link state interrupt configuration option. > > Link state control does not work in virtual drivers > > (virtio, vmxnet3, igbvf, and ixgbevf). Instead of having the application > > try and guess whether it will work or not provide a driver flag that > > can be checked instead. > > > > Note: if device driver doesn't support link state control, what > > would happen previously is that the code would never detect link > > transitions. This prevents that. > > [...] > > > @@ -197,6 +197,8 @@ struct rte_pci_driver { > > > > #define RTE_PCI_DRV_MULTIPLE 0x0002 > > /** Device needs to be unbound even if no module is provided */ > > #define RTE_PCI_DRV_FORCE_UNBIND 0x0004 > > > > +/** Device driver supports link state interrupt */ > > +#define RTE_PCI_DRV_LSC 0x0008 > > I feel RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC would be easier to understand. > Do you agree? > > Note that related event is RTE_ETH_EVENT_INTR_LSC > and configuration is intr_conf.lsc. > > Title should be "ethdev: add link state interrupt flag". A v3 would be nice. Thanks -- Thomas