From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 2/2] eal: add uevent pass and process
	function
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 00:24:51 +0100
Message-ID: <5621685.YHClJoWfgs@xps>
References: <1515575544-2141-3-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com>
 <1515679534-22473-1-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com>
 <1515679534-22473-2-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com,
 ferruh.yigit@intel.com, gaetan.rivet@6wind.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com,
 jblunck@infradead.org, shreyansh.jain@nxp.com, jingjing.wu@intel.com,
 helin.zhang@intel.com, motih@mellanox.com
To: Jeff Guo <jia.guo@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B7B1041
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 15 Jan 2018 00:25:23 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <1515679534-22473-2-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

11/01/2018 15:05, Jeff Guo:
> +enum rte_dev_state {
> +	RTE_DEV_UNDEFINED,	/**< unknown device state */
> +	RTE_DEV_FAULT,	/**< device fault or error */
> +	RTE_DEV_PARSED,	/**< device have been parsed on bus*/
> +	RTE_DEV_PROBED,	/**< devcie have been probed driver  */
> +};

Let's start with nitpicks: please be careful with spacing in comments.
+ typo: devcie
+ grammar: device has

What means parsed on bus? Is it "scanned"?

> +enum rte_dev_subsystem {
> +	RTE_DEV_SUBSYSTEM_UIO,
> +	RTE_DEV_SUBSYSTEM_VFIO,
> +	RTE_DEV_SUBSYSTEM_PCI,
> +	RTE_DEV_SUBSYSTEM_MAX
> +};

I don't think PCI and UIO/VFIO should be described at the same level.
Can you re-use the enum rte_kernel_driver?

> +enum event_monitor_netlink_group {
> +	RTE_DEV_EVENT_MONITOR_KERNEL,
> +	RTE_DEV_EVENT_MONITOR_UDEV,
> +};

This enum should be prefixed with rte_

> +	enum event_monitor_netlink_group group;	/**< device netlink group */

netlink is specific to Linux.
I don't think it should be in a generic API struct.