On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 02:40:48PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 03:33:27PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2015-05-13 11:01, Bruce Richardson: > > > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 09:30:45PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > >> 2015-05-12 19:04, Bruce Richardson: > > >>> drivers/e1000/e1000/e1000_hw.h | 1026 ++++ > > >> > > >> As explained in a previous comment, > > >> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-May/017509.html > > >> I think this path would be better: > > >> drivers/net/e1000/base/e1000_hw.h > > > > > > Two reasons why I didn't create the "net" subfolder: > > > 1. I initally forgot to consider it :-( > > > 2. While we may at some future point have other device driver types, are > > > we really > > > needing to start categorising PMDs at this point? > > > > > > As for the base driver part, I was viewing that as a something that > > > should be > > > a separate patch set, since it's unrelated to moving things to the drivers > > > subdir. > > > > I understand your points and I partially agree. > > However, file moves may be perturbing because it change habits > > and may complicate a bit the git history browsing. > > So I think it's better to minimize such moves and do altogether. > > > Ok. I'll see about renaming the base code directories as part of the overall > move process [Unless there are objections from any of the driver maintainers]. > > As for drivers vs drivers/net, I suppose there is no real difference in what > the path actually is, so I can make that change too. However, I still think I > prefer the shorter path. Anyone else any opinions on this [before I start > reworking this again]? >
A further thought on the splitting up of drivers. What about devices which provide more than one type of offload, how would the PMD for such a device be classified? /Bruce
