From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 28/28] bonding: remove pci device Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 22:35:24 +0100 Message-ID: <1958046.uufG92VmLf@xps13> References: <1446217733-9887-29-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Bernard Iremonger Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377DE5A56 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2015 22:36:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by wmec75 with SMTP id c75so46287848wme.1 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2015 13:36:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1446217733-9887-29-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2015-10-30 15:08, Bernard Iremonger: > + /* return 0 if bonded device */ > + if (eth_dev->data->dev_flags & RTE_ETH_DEV_BONDED) > + return 0; > + else > + return 1; > Why it is not a private data of the bonding device? Why the check on the device name is not relevant anymore?