From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] pci: place all uio pci device ids
 in a dedicated section
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:29:31 -0500
Message-ID: <20160119142930.GA25388@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
References: <1452430254-30390-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <1453120248-28274-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <1453120248-28274-11-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <3759018.lgeOm8Q2D2@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9C5B591A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:29:36 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3759018.lgeOm8Q2D2@xps13>
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>

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 08:30:40AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-01-18 13:30, David Marchand:
> > We could do something =E0 la modinfo, but let's keep it simple for no=
w.
> >=20
> > With this, you can extract the devices that need to be bound to uio /=
 vfio
> > with tools like objdump :
> >=20
> > $ objdump -j rte_pci_id_uio -s build/lib/librte_pmd_fm10k.so
> >=20
> > Contents of section rte_pci_id_uio:
> >  15760 8680a415 ffffffff 8680d015 ffffffff  ................
> >  15770 8680a515 ffffffff 00000000 00000000  ................
>=20
> Yes we need a modinfo-like tool.
> Currently, the UIO/VFIO binding can be done after parsing the PCI devic=
e list.
> It is better to define the device ids locally to their drivers but it m=
ust
> be integrated with an appropriate parsing tool at the same time.
> And more importantly than any tool, the format of these ELF data must b=
e
> properly defined, documented and extensible.
>=20
> Is there someone experimented with such format definition?
> Stephen, you were asking for this change, what is your opinion?
> I remember that Neil was also interested in this change:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-January/012115.html
> Panu, Christian, this change could be related to distribution packaging=
.
> Thanks for helping to move this change forward.

Yes, I would be interested in seeing this.  Is the ask here that someone =
do it?
As I recall from the last thread that you reference, I thought David M wa=
s
interested in writing it and soliciting for ideas.  If thats no longer th=
e case,
I can take a stab at writing it.

Neil