Hi Konstantin, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, > Konstantin > Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 6:10 PM > To: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo > <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: clean up rte_eth_dev_info_get > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Yigit, Ferruh > > Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 5:40 PM > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo > > <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: clean up > > rte_eth_dev_info_get > > > > On 2/1/2017 4:24 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > Hi Wenzhuo, > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wenzhuo Lu > > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 2:39 AM > > >> To: dev@dpdk.org > > >> Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: clean up > > >> rte_eth_dev_info_get > > >> > > >> It'not appropriate to call rte_eth_dev_info_get in PMD, as > > >> rte_eth_dev_info_get need to get info from PMD. > > >> Remove rte_eth_dev_info_get from PMD code and get the info > > >> directly. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo...@intel.com> > > >> --- > > >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 144 > > >> ++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > > >> 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 76 deletions(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > >> b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > >> index 64ce55a..f14a68b 100644 > > >> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c > > >> @@ -4401,17 +4401,17 @@ static int > ixgbevf_dev_xstats_get_names(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > >> int rar_entry; > > >> uint8_t *new_mac = (uint8_t *)(mac_addr); > > >> struct rte_eth_dev *dev; > > >> - struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info; > > >> + struct rte_pci_device *pci_dev; > > >> > > >> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port, -ENODEV); > > >> > > >> dev = &rte_eth_devices[port]; > > >> - rte_eth_dev_info_get(port, &dev_info); > > >> + pci_dev = IXGBE_DEV_TO_PCI(dev); > > >> > > >> - if (is_ixgbe_pmd(dev_info.driver_name) != 0) > > >> + if (is_ixgbe_pmd(dev->data->drv_name)) > > >> return -ENOTSUP; > > > > > > I wonder why do we need now that it is really an ixgbe device all over the > place? > > > > This device specific API, so it is missing merits of abstraction > > layer, application can these APIs with any port_id, API should be protected > for it. > > Ah ok, my bad - didn't realize from the patch that it affects only device > specific API :) Would It be too much hassle to move these functions into a > separate file (rte_ixgbe_pmd.c or so)? > Konstantin > > > > > > Konstantin > > > All the device specific API functions are prefixed with rte_pmd_ixgbe so I don't think a separate file is necessary.
Regards, Bernard.
