On Friday 16 December 2016 06:40 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote:
When a PMD is registred, it will associate itself with a bus.A bus is responsible for 'scan' of all the devices attached to it. All the scanned devices are attached to bus specific device_list. During the probe operation, 'match' of the drivers and devices would be done. Also, rather than adding a device to tail, a new device might be added to the list (pivoted on bus) at a predefined position, for example, adding it in order of addressing. Support for this is added as '*bus_insert'. This patch also adds necessary test framework to test the scan and match callbacks. Signed-off-by: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.j...@nxp.com> --- app/test/test_bus.c | 265 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_bus.c | 15 ++ lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_bus.h | 64 ++++++++ 3 files changed, 344 insertions(+) diff --git a/app/test/test_bus.c b/app/test/test_bus.c index 760d40a..ed95479 100644 --- a/app/test/test_bus.c +++ b/app/test/test_bus.c @@ -80,12 +80,32 @@ struct dummy_bus { struct rte_bus_list orig_bus_list = TAILQ_HEAD_INITIALIZER(orig_bus_list); +/* Forward declarations for callbacks from bus */ + +/* Bus A + * Scan would register devA1 and devA2 to bus + */ +int scan_fn_for_busA(struct rte_bus *bus); + +/* Bus B + * Scan would register devB1 and devB2 to bus + */ +int scan_fn_for_busB(struct rte_bus *bus); + +/* generic implementations wrapped around by above declarations */ +static int generic_scan_fn(struct rte_bus *bus); +static int generic_match_fn(struct rte_driver *drv, struct rte_device *dev); + struct rte_bus busA = { .name = "busA", /* "busA" */ + .scan = scan_fn_for_busA, + .match = generic_match_fn, }; struct rte_bus busB = { .name = "busB", /* "busB */ + .scan = scan_fn_for_busB, + .match = generic_match_fn, }; struct rte_driver driverA = { @@ -184,6 +204,92 @@ dump_device_tree(void) printf("------>8-------\n"); } +/* @internal + * Move over the dummy_buses and find the entry matching the bus object + * passed as argument. + * For each device in that dummy_buses list, register. + * + * @param bus + * bus to scan againt test entry + * @return + * 0 for successful scan, even if no devices are found + * !0 for any error in scanning (like, invalid bus) + */ +static int +generic_scan_fn(struct rte_bus *bus) +{ + int i = 0; + struct rte_device *dev = NULL; + struct dummy_bus *db = NULL; + + if (!bus) + return -1; + + /* Extract the device tree node using the bus passed */ + for (i = 0; dummy_buses[i].name; i++) { + if (!strcmp(dummy_buses[i].name, bus->name)) { + db = &dummy_buses[i]; + break; + } + } + + if (!db) + return -1; + + /* For all the devices in the device tree (dummy_buses), add device */ + for (i = 0; db->devices[i]; i++) { + dev = &(db->devices[i]->dev); + rte_eal_bus_add_device(bus, dev); + } + + return 0; +} + +/* @internal + * Obtain bus from driver object. Match the address of rte_device object + * with all the devices associated with that bus. + * + * Being a test function, all this does is validate that device object + * provided is available on the same bus to which driver is registered. + * + * @param drv + * driver to which matching is to be performed + * @param dev + * device object to match with driver + * @return + * 0 for successful match + * !0 for failed match + */ +static int +generic_match_fn(struct rte_driver *drv, struct rte_device *dev) +{ + struct rte_bus *bus; + struct rte_device *dev_p = NULL; + + /* Match is based entirely on address of 'dev' and 'dev_p' extracted + * from bus->device_list. + */ + + /* a driver is registered with the bus *before* the scan. */ + bus = drv->bus; + TAILQ_FOREACH(dev_p, &bus->device_list, next) { + if (dev == dev_p) + return 0; + } + + return 1; +} + +int +scan_fn_for_busA(struct rte_bus *bus) { + return generic_scan_fn(bus); +} + +int +scan_fn_for_busB(struct rte_bus *bus) { + return generic_scan_fn(bus); +} + static int test_bus_setup(void) { @@ -391,6 +497,155 @@ test_driver_unregistration_on_bus(void) } +static int +test_device_unregistration_on_bus(void) +{ + int i; + struct rte_bus *bus = NULL; + struct rte_device *dev; + + for (i = 0; dummy_buses[i].name; i++) { + bus = rte_eal_get_bus(dummy_buses[i].name); + if (!bus) { + printf("Unable to find bus (%s)\n", + dummy_buses[i].name); + return -1; + } + + /* For bus 'bus', unregister all devices */ + TAILQ_FOREACH(dev, &bus->device_list, next) { + rte_eal_bus_remove_device(dev); + } + } + + for (i = 0; dummy_buses[i].name; i++) { + bus = rte_eal_get_bus(dummy_buses[i].name); + + if (!TAILQ_EMPTY(&bus->device_list)) { + printf("Unable to remove all devices on bus (%s)\n", + bus->name); + return -1; + } + } + + /* All devices from all buses have been removed */ + printf("All devices on all buses unregistered.\n"); + dump_device_tree(); + + return 0; +} + +/* @internal + * For each bus registered, call the scan function to identify devices + * on the bus. + * + * @param void + * @return + * 0 for successful scan + * !0 for unsuccessful scan + * + */ +static int +test_bus_scan(void) +{ + int ret; + struct rte_bus *bus; + + TAILQ_FOREACH(bus, &rte_bus_list, next) { + /* Call the scan function for each bus */ + ret = bus->scan(bus); + if (ret) { + printf("Scan of buses failed.\n"); + return -1; + } + } + + printf("Scan of all buses completed.\n"); + dump_device_tree(); + + return 0; +} + +/* @internal + * Function to perform 'probe' and link devices and drivers on a bus. + * This would work over all the buses registered, and all devices and drivers + * registered with it - call match on each pair. + * Aim is to test the match_fn for each bus. + * + * @param void + * @return + * 0 for successful probe + * !0 for failure in probe + * + */ +static int +test_probe_on_bus(void) +{ + int ret = 0; + int i, j; + struct rte_bus *bus = NULL; + struct rte_device *dev = NULL; + struct rte_driver *drv = NULL; + + /* In case of this test: + * 1. for each bus in rte_bus_list + * 2. for each device in bus->device_list + * 3. for each driver in bus->driver_list + * 4. call match + * 5. link driver and device + * 6. Verify the linkage. + */
This comment style is indeed in a warning from checkpatch. My bad - somehow I missed fixing this before sending out. v4, along with any other major comments/reviews. <snip> - Shreyansh
