From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 18/23] ethdev: Helper to map to struct
	rte_pci_device
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:30:32 +0100
Message-ID: <4070328.Wvu0M6jAFZ@xps13>
References: <1482332986-7599-1-git-send-email-jblunck@infradead.org>
 <2253386.A4pj8ELuPQ@xps13>
 <CALe+Z00iZxx=oPV7TGxR3pwVHaGRGibLwvLY8802cAC1+q6vgg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
 David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>,
 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442FE10DF3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 09:30:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id a197so194067621wmd.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:30:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALe+Z00iZxx=oPV7TGxR3pwVHaGRGibLwvLY8802cAC1+q6vgg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

2016-12-22 19:13, Jan Blunck:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> > 2016-12-21 16:09, Jan Blunck:
> >> PCI drivers could use this helper instead of directly accessing fields of
> >> rte_eth_dev to map to rte_pci_device.
> > [...]
> >> +/**
> >> + * @internal
> >> + * Helper for drivers that need to convert from rte_eth_dev to rte_pci_device.
> >> + */
> >> +static inline struct rte_pci_device *__attribute__((always_inline))
> >> +rte_eth_dev_to_pci(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
> >> +{
> >> +     return eth_dev->pci_dev;
> >> +}
> >
> > Why adding this function instead of just using DEV_PCI_DEV(eth_dev->device)?
> >
> > I think we must try to avoid any PCI (or other bus) reference inside ethdev.h.
> 
> David requested to move it from rte_pci.h to rte_ethdev.h.
> 
> It could get forward declared here if one doesn't use it. On the other
> hand the rte_pci.h would be required to include rte_ethdev.h if we
> move it.

I think there is a misunderstanding.
I was just suggesting to drop this function.