2016-06-22 10:19, Zyta Szpak: > Note that if we remove rte_eth_dev_get_reg_length() then it will break > all of the drivers that implement it. Shall I remove it all leave it and > modify only ethtool to use rte_eth_dev_get_regs() to get reg size? In > the end the drivers will have to implement the part of setting the size > in reg_info struct. rte_eth_dev_get_regs() itself wouldn't change at all. > Or do you have different opinion?
igb, ixgbe and i40e must be updated in the same patch to comply with the new behaviour of rte_eth_dev_get_regs. rte_eth_dev_get_reg_length can be deprecated and removed in the next release. > On 21.06.2016 11:55, Zyta Szpak wrote: > > OK, I will do the v4. > > > > On 17.06.2016 12:20, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > >> 2016-06-13 16:51, Remy Horton: > >>> On 12/06/2016 15:51, Zyta Szpak wrote: > >>>> I would prefer having only one function rte_eth_dev_get_regs() > >>>> which returns length and width if data is NULL. > >>>> The first call is a parameter request before buffer allocation, > >>>> and the second call fills the buffer. > >>>> > >>>> We can deprecate the old API and introduce this new one. > >>>> > >>>> Opinions? > >>>> > >>>> In my opinion as it is now it works fine. Gathering all parameters in > >>>> one callback might be a good idea if the maintainer also agrees to > >>>> that > >>>> because as I mentioned, it interferes. > >>> From my perspective changing rte_eth_dev_get_regs() isn't a > >>> problem, as > >>> it isn't used directly rather than through rte_ethtool_get_regs().. > >> Zyta, would you like to make a v4? > > >
