On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 02:09:18PM +0800, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
...
> I basically agree with you. We have two dimensions here:
>
> legacy modern
> physical virtio device: Use virtio_read_caps_phys() to
> distinguish
> virtual virtio device (Tetsuya): Use virtio_read_caps_virt() to
> distinguish
> virtual virtio device (Jianfeng): does not need a "configuration space
> layout", no need to distinguish
I guess you meant to build a form or something, but seems you failed :)
>
> So in vtpci_init(), we needs to test "eth_dev->dev_type" firstly
>
> vtpci_init() {
> if (eth_dev->dev_type == RTE_ETH_DEV_PCI) {
> if (virtio_read_caps_phys()) {
> // modern
> } else {
> // legacy
> }
> } else {
> if (Tetsuya's way) {
> if (virtio_read_caps_virt()) {
> // modern
> } else {
> // legacy
> }
> } else {
> // Jianfeng's way
> }
> }
> }
Normally, I'd like to hide the details inside virtio_read_caps(): I don't
want similar codes to be appeared twice. And if it can be simply done
by "if (eth_dev->dev_type == ...)", I'd like to do it in this way. If not,
introducing another set of operation abstractions as suggested in my
another email might be a better option.
> And from Yuanhan's angle, I think he does not need to address this problem.
Yep; it just has nothing to do with this patch set.
--yliu
