From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zhang, Qi Z" Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 03/19] ethdev: enable hotplug on multi-process Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:57:14 +0000 Message-ID: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115324B039@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <20180607123849.14439-1-qi.z.zhang@intel.com> <6685892.NTdOAgpAes@xps> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153249D11@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <3322666.pe3fEbMk70@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Burakov, Anatoly" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "Shelton, Benjamin H" , "Vangati, Narender" , "gaetan.rivet@6wind.com" To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 070E51BEF2 for ; Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:57:19 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <3322666.pe3fEbMk70@xps> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2018 3:34 PM > To: Zhang, Qi Z > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Burakov, Anatoly ; Ananyev, > Konstantin ; Richardson, Bruce > ; Yigit, Ferruh ; She= lton, > Benjamin H ; Vangati, Narender > ; gaetan.rivet@6wind.com > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 03/19] ethdev: enable hotplug on > multi-process >=20 > 04/07/2018 04:26, Zhang, Qi Z: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > 03/07/2018 23:57, Thomas Monjalon: > > > > 03/07/2018 17:03, Zhang, Qi Z: > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > > > > 03/07/2018 14:59, Zhang, Qi Z: > > > > > > > > > +do_eth_dev_attach(const char *devargs, uint16_t > > > > > > > > > +*port_id); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you are duplicating rte_eth_dev_attach which is flawed > > > > > > > > in its design and should be deprecated... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, just to know this, but I guess it will not be the issue, > > > > > > > if we move the dev > > > > > > sync mechanism into eal layer in future right? > > > > > > > > > > > > Future is now :) > > > > > > We must stop mixing devargs and port id in the same layer. > > > > > > > > > > Ok, is there any RFC I can learn? > > > > > > > > RFC for what? > > > > It is just a design issue that we must stop propagating. > > > > > > Please read at this commit, which is 2 years old: > > > http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=3Db0fb26685570 > > > It was starting to fix early design mistakes, but unfortunately it > > > is not yet totally fixed today. > > > > OK, rte_eth_dev_attach is going to be deprecated. > > Do you mean we will use rte_eal_hotplug_add to attach a device > > directly, then the device driver will be responsible for propagating > > all the ethdev port, and application could register callback for > > RTE_ETH_EVENT_NEW to know new ports are created, is that correct? >=20 > Exact! > All what you describe is already implemented. >=20 > To make it clear, EAL and ethdev must stay 2 separate layers. > The bridge between these 2 layers is done only by PMDs. OK, I will move the IPC stuff from ethdev layer into eal layer in v9 Thanks! >=20 >=20 > > > > > > > > As you may have noticed, rte_eth_dev_attach() is calling > > > > > > > > rte_eal_hotplug_add() which manages the EAL device. > > > > > > > > It is wrong because the relation between an ethdev port > > > > > > > > and an EAL device is not a 1:1 mapping. > > > > > > > > We must manage the ethdev port as one of the possible > > > > > > > > abstractions of a device represented by rte_device. >=20 >=20