From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] Generalize PCI specific EAL function/structures Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 15:36:07 +0200 Message-ID: <295101088.MT2WGLcZeq@xps13> References: <1472704915-13112-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <4e8b181f-8d46-f4b4-3821-a19f5c622ec1@nxp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: David Marchand , dev@dpdk.org, Jan Viktorin To: Shreyansh Jain Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com (mail-wm0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E451D6936 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 15:36:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id p138so151956477wmb.1 for ; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 06:36:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4e8b181f-8d46-f4b4-3821-a19f5c622ec1@nxp.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" 2016-10-03 11:07, Shreyansh Jain: > Hi David, > > On Friday 30 September 2016 09:01 PM, David Marchand wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > >> (I rebased these over HEAD 7b3c4f3) > >> > >> These patches were initially part of Jan's original series on SoC > >> Framework ([1],[2]). An update to that series, without these patches, > >> was posted here [3]. > >> > >> Main motivation for these is aim of introducing a non-PCI centric > >> subsystem in EAL. As of now the first usecase is SoC, but not limited to > >> it. > >> > >> 4 patches in this series are independent of each other, as well as SoC > >> framework. All these focus on generalizing some structure or functions > >> present with the PCI specific code to EAL Common area (or splitting a > >> function to be more userful). > > > > Those patches move linux specifics (binding pci devices using sysfs) > > to common infrastucture. > > We have no proper hotplug support on bsd, but if we had some common > > code we should at least try to make the apis generic. > > > > I am not sure if I understood your point well. Just to confirm - you are > stating that the movement done in the patches might not suit BSD. > Probably you are talking about (Patch 3/4 and 4/4). > Is my understanding correct? > > So, movement to just Linux area is not enough? > I am not well versed with BSD way of doing something similar so if > someone can point it out, I can integrate that. (I will investigate it > at my end as well). > > This patchset makes the PCI->EAL movement *only* for Linux for sysfs > bind/unbind. (I should add this to cover letter, at the least). The concern is about function declarations in lib/librte_eal/common/eal_private.h We cannot be sure it can be applicable to something else than Linux. As it is implemented in Linux only, it should not be in a common header.