On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monja...@6wind.com> wrote: > 2016-12-07 15:43, Shreyansh Jain: >> IMO, the way Bus is kept is debatable. >> - should it be in EAL (lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal_pci.c like Bus >> patches) [1]? >> - Should it a 'handler/driver' parallel to device drivers? >> >> I personally prefer a clean layer for buses with: >> >> - RTE_SDK/drivers/net/dpaa2/ >> - RTE_SDK/drivers/bus >> - RTE_SDK/drivers/bus/dpaa2/ >> - RTE_SDK/drivers/bus/dpaa2/dpaa2_bus.c etc. > > I agree, it is a good idea.
Indeed. >> For PCI, which is generic (or for other similar generic buses, like >> platform), we can keep the implementation within lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/*. > > I would be in favor of moving PCI and vdev code from EAL to drivers/bus/. > We can keep the API in EAL and implement the buses as drivers. > > Other opinions? The only issue I see for now is how to pass the configuration to these drivers, like vdev args or the pci blacklist/whitelist. -- David Marchand
