From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/13] ethdev: add device matching field name Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 14:16:21 +0200 Message-ID: <20180921121621.rjo7esvng7gjuri4@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> References: <6077733.FS8kXFb8lC@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, arybchenko@solarflare.com To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com (mail-wr1-f66.google.com [209.85.221.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871FCF04 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 14:16:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id j15-v6so8563185wrt.8 for ; Fri, 21 Sep 2018 05:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6077733.FS8kXFb8lC@xps> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:17:13PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 19/09/2018 18:03, Gaetan Rivet: > > The eth device class can now parse a field name, > > matching the eth_dev name with one passed as > > > > "class=eth,name=xxxxxx" > > I am not sure what is the purpose of the "name" property. > I think we should not need it to choose a port by its ethdev name. rte_eth_dev_get_port_by_name seems pretty close. Which fields do you think should be proposed first as a getter on the eth class? Or do you have a list of fields the eth class should be restricted to? > If you are thinking about a vdev, we can use the rte_device name (at bus level). This patch is only about eth class, it has no impact on buses. -- Gaëtan Rivet 6WIND