> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@amd.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 5:31 PM
> To: Liu, Mingxia <mingxia....@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Xing, Beilei
> <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Zhang, Yuying <yuying.zh...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/21] net/cpfl: support device initialization
>
> On 3/2/2023 10:35 AM, Mingxia Liu wrote:
> > Support device init and add the following dev ops:
> > - dev_configure
> > - dev_close
> > - dev_infos_get
> > - link_update
> > - dev_supported_ptypes_get
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mingxia Liu <mingxia....@intel.com>
>
> <...>
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/doc/guides/nics/cpfl.rst
> > @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
> > +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> > + Copyright(c) 2022 Intel Corporation.
> > +
>
> s/2022/2023
>
> <...>
>
> > +static int
> > +cpfl_pci_probe(struct rte_pci_driver *pci_drv __rte_unused,
> > + struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev) {
> > + struct cpfl_vport_param vport_param;
> > + struct cpfl_adapter_ext *adapter;
> > + struct cpfl_devargs devargs;
> > + char name[RTE_ETH_NAME_MAX_LEN];
> > + int i, retval;
> > + bool first_probe = false;
> > +
> > + if (!cpfl_adapter_list_init) {
> > + rte_spinlock_init(&cpfl_adapter_lock);
> > + TAILQ_INIT(&cpfl_adapter_list);
> > + cpfl_adapter_list_init = true;
> > + }
> > +
> > + adapter = cpfl_find_adapter_ext(pci_dev);
> > + if (adapter == NULL) {
> > + first_probe = true;
> > + adapter = rte_zmalloc("cpfl_adapter_ext",
> > + sizeof(struct cpfl_adapter_ext), 0);
> > + if (adapter == NULL) {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to allocate adapter.");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + retval = cpfl_adapter_ext_init(pci_dev, adapter);
> > + if (retval != 0) {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to init adapter.");
> > + return retval;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rte_spinlock_lock(&cpfl_adapter_lock);
> > + TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&cpfl_adapter_list, adapter, next);
> > + rte_spinlock_unlock(&cpfl_adapter_lock);
> > + }
> > +
> > + retval = cpfl_parse_devargs(pci_dev, adapter, &devargs);
> > + if (retval != 0) {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "Failed to parse private devargs");
> > + goto err;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (devargs.req_vport_nb == 0) {
> > + /* If no vport devarg, create vport 0 by default. */
> > + vport_param.adapter = adapter;
> > + vport_param.devarg_id = 0;
> > + vport_param.idx = cpfl_vport_idx_alloc(adapter);
> > + if (vport_param.idx == CPFL_INVALID_VPORT_IDX) {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "No space for vport %u",
> vport_param.devarg_id);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "cpfl_%s_vport_0",
> > + pci_dev->device.name);
> > + retval = rte_eth_dev_create(&pci_dev->device, name,
> > + sizeof(struct idpf_vport),
> > + NULL, NULL, cpfl_dev_vport_init,
> > + &vport_param);
> > + if (retval != 0)
> > + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to create default vport
> 0");
> > + } else {
> > + for (i = 0; i < devargs.req_vport_nb; i++) {
> > + vport_param.adapter = adapter;
> > + vport_param.devarg_id = devargs.req_vports[i];
> > + vport_param.idx = cpfl_vport_idx_alloc(adapter);
> > + if (vport_param.idx == CPFL_INVALID_VPORT_IDX) {
> > + PMD_INIT_LOG(ERR, "No space for
> vport %u", vport_param.devarg_id);
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "cpfl_%s_vport_%d",
> > + pci_dev->device.name,
> > + devargs.req_vports[i]);
> > + retval = rte_eth_dev_create(&pci_dev->device,
> name,
> > + sizeof(struct idpf_vport),
> > + NULL, NULL,
> cpfl_dev_vport_init,
> > + &vport_param);
> > + if (retval != 0)
> > + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to create
> vport %d",
> > + vport_param.devarg_id);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +err:
> > + if (first_probe) {
> > + rte_spinlock_lock(&cpfl_adapter_lock);
> > + TAILQ_REMOVE(&cpfl_adapter_list, adapter, next);
> > + rte_spinlock_unlock(&cpfl_adapter_lock);
> > + cpfl_adapter_ext_deinit(adapter);
> > + rte_free(adapter);
> > + }
>
> Is 'first_probe' left intentionally? If so, what is the reason to have this
> condition?
[beileix] It's related to create vports at runtime, this feature will be
implemented in the future, but now it doesn't suppor.
>
