> -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang, Qi Z > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 7:27 PM > To: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh > <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H > <benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender > <narender.vang...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device as first > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Burakov, Anatoly > > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 5:41 PM > > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; > > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh > > <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H > > <benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender > > <narender.vang...@intel.com> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device as > > first > > > > On 28-Jun-18 10:29 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Burakov, Anatoly > > >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 5:25 PM > > >> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > >> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; > > >> dev@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; > > >> Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H > > >> <benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender > > >> <narender.vang...@intel.com> > > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device > > >> as first > > >> > > >> On 28-Jun-18 2:52 AM, Qi Zhang wrote: > > >>> When attach a private device from secondary as the first one, we > > >>> need to make sure rte_eth_dev_shared_data is initialized, the > > >>> patch add necessary IPC for secondary to inform primary to do > initialization. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com> > > >>> --- > > >> > > >> Does this mean hotplug is broken before this patch? Can it be moved > > earlier? > > > > > > Basically patch 4,5,6 depends on patch 3, they have no dependency > > > each > > other. > > > > So... is that a yes? :) > > Yes, 3 ,6,4, 5 is better, will re-order
Apologies, actually patch 6 depends on patch 5, which build the secondary to primary request channel, so current sequence is necessary. > Thanks > Qi > > > > > > > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Thanks, > > >> Anatoly > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Anatoly
