From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zyta Szpak Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ethdev: add callback to get register size in bytes Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:55:13 +0200 Message-ID: <57690F01.6020600@semihalf.com> References: <1464767771-19159-1-git-send-email-zr@semihalf.com> <575ED666.2010509@intel.com> <1667158.opORKPN5aG@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Remy Horton , dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f46.google.com (mail-lf0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DCD8ADCA for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:55:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf0-f46.google.com with SMTP id f6so15344196lfg.0 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 02:55:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1667158.opORKPN5aG@xps13> 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" OK, I will do the v4. On 17.06.2016 12:20, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-06-13 16:51, Remy Horton: >> On 12/06/2016 15:51, Zyta Szpak wrote: >>> I would prefer having only one function rte_eth_dev_get_regs() >>> which returns length and width if data is NULL. >>> The first call is a parameter request before buffer allocation, >>> and the second call fills the buffer. >>> >>> We can deprecate the old API and introduce this new one. >>> >>> Opinions? >>> >>> In my opinion as it is now it works fine. Gathering all parameters in >>> one callback might be a good idea if the maintainer also agrees to that >>> because as I mentioned, it interferes. >> From my perspective changing rte_eth_dev_get_regs() isn't a problem, as >> it isn't used directly rather than through rte_ethtool_get_regs().. > Zyta, would you like to make a v4?