On Wednesday 15 February 2017 07:41 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote:
On Wednesday 15 February 2017 03:32 PM, Jan Blunck wrote:
This is a refactoring of the virtual device probing which moves into into
a proper bus structure.
Signed-off-by: Jan Blunck <jblu...@infradead.org>
---
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c | 22 -----------------
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_vdev.c | 44
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
[...]
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_vdev.c
b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_vdev.c
index 7d6e54f..523a3d6 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_vdev.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_vdev.c
@@ -37,8 +37,10 @@
#include <stdint.h>
#include <sys/queue.h>
[...]
+
+static struct rte_bus rte_vdev_bus = {
+ .scan = vdev_scan,
+ .probe = vdev_probe,
+};
+
+RTE_REGISTER_BUS_LATE(virtual, rte_vdev_bus);
Does it matter if VDEV buses are registered before or after other
buses? Either way, the callbacks would be called in the order specified
in EAL.
Just ignore this comment - I am misunderstood something.
But another question: Is there specific reason VDEV should be
registered/scanned *after* other devices? Is there some specific problem
if we do otherwise? (I think this is should be done, but I don't have a
specific reason).
