From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/18] refactor eal driver registration
 code
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 12:46:11 +0000
Message-ID: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C219F4A8E6@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <RFCPATCH>
 <1441364514-24905-1-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
 <20150904111850.GA10756@bricha3-MOBL3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242A28D38
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  4 Sep 2015 14:46:13 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20150904111850.GA10756@bricha3-MOBL3>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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>

Hi Bruce,
<snip>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 00/18] refactor eal driver registratio=
n
> code
>=20
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 12:01:36PM +0100, Bernard Iremonger wrote:
> > At present the eal driver registration code is more complicated than
> > it needs to be.
> >
> > This RFC proposes to simplify the eal driver registration code.
> >
> > Remove the type field from the eal driver structure.
> > Refactor the eal driver registration code to use the name field in the
> > eal driver structure instead of the type field.
> >
> > Modify all PMD's to use the modified eal driver structure.
> > Initialise the name field in the eal driver structure in some PMD's
> > where it is not initialised at present.
> >
> >
> Hi,
>=20
> I don't think I like this approach very much. It seems very brittle to re=
move
> the explicit type field and starting to rely on the drivers putting a pre=
fix in the
> name instead i.e. implicit typing.
>=20
> What is the major concern with marking drivers as virtual or physical? My
> thinking is that we should keep the type field, just perhaps change PDEV =
to
> be more descriptive in identifying the type of physical device, e.g. DEV_=
PCI.
>=20
> Regards,
> /Bruce

The eth_  prefix is already required  for vdev's  for example:
testpmd -c f -n 4 --vdev=3D'eth_pcap0,iface=3Deth0'
testpmd -c f -n 4 --vdev=3Deth_ring0

The eth_ prefix should not be used for pdev's.

Keeping the type field and name field is duplicating  information

Regards,

Bernard.