From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] eal: pci: add api to rd/wr pci bar
	region
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 16:49:33 +0800
Message-ID: <20160202084933.GJ4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1454091717-32251-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com>
 <20160201134854.GE4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <CAAyOgsa9UEBi3euQxef-MzFJeFthjSCAD42H2Y43q38-Jj2vYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160202054345.GI4257@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <CALwxeUvVQbGnwkbzTV5Q0Q+xzy3r3gntKbjzyYd+7Czc=ePfEA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D9D5A06
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  2 Feb 2016 09:48:04 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALwxeUvVQbGnwkbzTV5Q0Q+xzy3r3gntKbjzyYd+7Czc=ePfEA@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>

On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 06:50:18AM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 09:44:14AM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
> >> Current use-case is virtio: It is used as io_bar which is first
> >> bar[1]. But implementation is generic, can be used to do rd/wr for
> >> other bar index too. Also vfio facilitate user to do rd/wr to pci_bars
> >> w/o mapping that bar, So apis will be useful for such cases in future.
> >>
> >> AFAIU: uio has read/write_config api only and Yes if bar region mapped
> >> then no need to do rd/wr, user can directly access the pci_memory. But
> >> use-case of this api entirely different: unmapped memory by
> >> application context i.e.. vfio_rd/wr-way {pread/pwrite-way}.
> >>
> >> Is above explanation convincing? Pl. let me know.
> >
> > TBH, not really. So, as you stated, it should be generic APIs to
> > read/write bar space, but limiting it to VFIO only and claiming
> > that read/write bar space is not support by other drivers (such
> > as UIO) while in fact it can (in some ways) doesn't seem right
> > to me.
> >
> > Anyway, it's just some thoughts from me. David, comments?
> 
> >From the very start, same opinion.
> We should have a unique api to access those, and eal should hide
> details like kernel drivers (uio, vfio, whatever) to the pmd.
> 
> Now the thing is, how to do this in an elegant and efficient way.

I was thinking that we may just make it be IO port specific read/
write functions:

	rte_eal_pci_ioport_read(dev, bar, buf, size)
	{

		return if not an IO bar;

		if (has io)
			return inb/w/l();

		if (vfio)
			return vfio_ioport_read();

		else, claim aloud that io port read is not allowed
	}

Let us not handle memory bar resource here: in such case, you should
go with rte_eal_pci_map_device() and do it with memory mapped io.

Does that make any sense?

	--yliu