From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Marchand Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfio: Support for no-IOMMU mode Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:24:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1450728967-9686-1-git-send-email-anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <1584319.QMRQbZMs1h@xps13> <2170759.xLIetSvQoP@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com (mail-ob0-f169.google.com [209.85.214.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 337E19594 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:24:55 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ob0-f169.google.com with SMTP id zv1so3357650obb.2 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:24:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2170759.xLIetSvQoP@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" On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-01-27 10:08, Burakov, Anatoly: >> > Why a new file for these functions? >> >> Well, my thought was to make future extensions easier by way of avoiding mixing irrelevant and/or general code with driver-specific code. I can change it back if that's not OK. > > No strong opinion here. > David? Hum, no strong opinion either, but I don't think we really need to split this file for this much code. Besides, if we keep all code in eal_pci_vfio.c, there is no need to expose those structures through eal_pci_init.h. -- David Marchand