2017-02-15 12:08, Jan Blunck:
> > int rte_eal_dev_attach(const char *name, const char *devargs)
> > {
> > - struct rte_pci_addr addr;
> > + int ret = 1;
> > + struct rte_bus *bus;
> >
> > if (name == NULL || devargs == NULL) {
> > RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Invalid device or arguments provided\n");
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > - if (eal_parse_pci_DomBDF(name, &addr) == 0) {
> > - if (rte_eal_pci_probe_one(&addr) < 0)
> > + FOREACH_BUS(bus) {
> > + if (!bus->attach) {
> > + RTE_LOG(DEBUG, EAL, "Bus (%s) doesn't implement"
> > + " attach.\n", bus->name);
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > + ret = bus->attach(name);
>
> Enforcing a globally unique naming scheme for the low-level device
> makes this complicated for users. There are buses that enumerate the
> devices just by an integer so we will have conflicts.
>
> I think it is better to change the signature of rte_eal_dev_attach()
> instead and find the correct bus based on its name. Also I believe the
> API is more user friendly if we pass the complete (raw) devargs string
> instead of the name/args pair.
I thought we could have a bus prefix in the name so there is no conflict.
How do you imagine the full devargs?
> > + if (!ret) /* device successfully attached */
> > + return ret;
> > + if (ret > 0) /* device not found on bus */
> > + continue;
> > + else
> > goto err;
> > + }
>
