From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] librte_ether: add fields from
	rte_pci_driver to rte_eth_dev and rte_eth_dev_data.
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:07:51 +0200
Message-ID: <3040981.rvdZqrEcfG@xps13>
References: <1440690041-32391-2-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 <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
 [209.85.212.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86C991C8
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:09:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wiclp12 with SMTP id lp12so771237wic.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 07:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1440690041-32391-2-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.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>

2015-08-27 16:40, Bernard Iremonger:
> add dev_flags to rte_eth_dev, add macros for dev_flags.
> add numa_node to rte_eth_dev_data.
> use dev_type to distinguish between vdev's and pdev's.
> remove unused RTE_ETH_DEV_MAX.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
[...]
> @@ -424,7 +425,10 @@ rte_eth_dev_socket_id(uint8_t port_id)
>  {
>  	if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id))
>  		return -1;
> -	return rte_eth_devices[port_id].pci_dev->numa_node;
> +	if (rte_eth_devices[port_id].dev_type == RTE_ETH_DEV_PCI)
> +		return rte_eth_devices[port_id].pci_dev->numa_node;
> +	else
> +		return rte_eth_devices[port_id].data->numa_node;

Clearly not the way to go.
We should remove the special cases (PCI, PDEV, VDEV) instead of adding
more checks.