2016-12-15 09:26, Stephen Hemminger: > On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:19:44 +0530 > Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.j...@nxp.com> wrote: > > It is not a scale-able model where we have to change eth_driver/eth_dev > > for every new device type, other than PCI. Maybe VMBus is _very_ close > > to PCI so no changes are required in PCI layer (common, linuxapp, > > bsdapp) - but, for others it won't stop there. > > > > At the least, rte_pci_driver/rte_pci_device should be removed from > > eth_driver & rte_eth_dev, respectively - relying on rte_driver and > > rte_device. > > > > This is the primary reason work on the SoC patchset and now the new Bus > > model is being done. > > Agreed. the better long term model is to use C style inheritance where > rte_pci_driver has eth_driver inside. > The other alternative is to make the second element an opaque pointer. > > But that was too big a change, and not necessary to get VMBUS to work. > Longer term refactoring will take more effort. Go ahead and address it > with a better bus model, but that probably isn't going to be ready for > a couple of releases.
We'll consider only the approach of generalizing the bus model for integr ation. Stephen, you are welcome to help make it happen and rebase your work on top of this new model. Thanks
