Hello Stephen, Any suggestions ? Regards Sunil Kumar Kori
>-----Original Message----- >From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Sunil Kumar Kori >Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 4:30 PM >To: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> >Cc: dev@dpdk.org >Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus scanning to >allowed devices > > > >Regards >Sunil Kumar Kori > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> >>Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 9:43 PM >>To: Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com> >>Cc: dev@dpdk.org >>Subject: [EXT] Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus scanning >>to allowed devices >> >>External Email >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> /* Create dummy pci device to get devargs */ >>> + dummy_dev.addr.domain = >>matches[i].pc_sel.pc_domain; >>> + dummy_dev.addr.bus = matches[i].pc_sel.pc_bus; >>> + dummy_dev.addr.devid = matches[i].pc_sel.pc_dev; >>> + dummy_dev.addr.function = >>matches[i].pc_sel.pc_func; >>> + dummy_dev.device.devargs = >>> + >> pci_devargs_lookup(&dummy_dev); >>> + >>> + /* Check that device should be ignored or not */ >>> + if (pci_ignore_device(&dummy_dev)) >>> + continue; >> >>It seems that you are creating dummy_dev as an alternative to passing >>just the PCI bus/device/function. Wouldn't be easier to just use BDF >>instead. Dummy arguments on the stack can lead to more corner cases in >>the future if device subsystem changes. >Agreed and initially I have implemented using BDF only instead of using >dummy device. >But using that approach, I was not able to use existing APIs to get devargs and >ignore device. >I had to write almost same functions to solve the purpose. So just to avoid >having replica of same code, I followed this approach. Please suggest. >> >>> +/** >>> + * Get the devargs of a PCI device. >>> + * >>> + * @param pci_dev >>> + * PCI device to be validated >>> + * @return >>> + * devargs on succes, NULL otherwise >>> + */ >>> +struct rte_devargs *pci_devargs_lookup(struct rte_pci_device >>> +*pci_dev); >> >>Must be marked experimental (or internal). >>The pci_device should be marked const. >Okay but If I go with BDF one then this change is not required anyway. >> >> >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * Validate whether a pci device should be ignored or not. >>> + * >>> + * @param pci_dev >>> + * PCI device to be validated >>> + * @return >>> + * 1 if device is to be ignored, 0 otherwise >>> + */ >>> +bool pci_ignore_device(const struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev); >> >>ditto >ditto
