On 1/18/21 2:16 PM, Xueming Li wrote:
> To support more representor type, this patch introduces representor type
> enum. The enum is subject to extend for new types upcoming.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xueming Li <xuemi...@nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>
One nit below and a question below.
In any case:
Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
[snip]
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_driver.h
> b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_driver.h
> index 0eacfd8425..3bc5c5bbbb 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_driver.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_driver.h
> @@ -1193,6 +1193,14 @@ __rte_internal
> int
> rte_eth_switch_domain_free(uint16_t domain_id);
>
> +/** Ethernet device representor type */
> +enum rte_eth_representor_type {
> + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_NONE, /**< not a representor. */
> + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_VF, /**< representor of VF. */
> + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_SF, /**< representor of SF. */
> + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_PF, /**< representor of host PF. */
RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_SF and PF looks dead in the patch.
IMHO, addition of these members here make future patches
which add support inconsistent.
> +};
> +
> /** Generic Ethernet device arguments */
> struct rte_eth_devargs {
> uint16_t ports[RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS];
> @@ -1203,6 +1211,7 @@ struct rte_eth_devargs {
> /** representor port/s identifier to enable on device */
> uint16_t nb_representor_ports;
> /** number of ports in representor port field */
> + enum rte_eth_representor_type type; /* type of representor */
Is it intended and documented limitation that we can't add
different type representors in one request? Or am I missing
something and it is possible?
> };
>
> /**
>
