On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > 26/05/2017 18:11, Ferruh Yigit: >> Device name resides in two different locations, in rte_device->name and >> in ethernet device private data. > > Yes would be nice to remove the name from rte_eth_dev_data. >
I wonder if this is really the right thing to do. The name in the eth_dev data is the eth_dev device name and it might be different from the low-level device name. Some busses might use UUID as the device identifier and I don't believe that this is a user friendly name. >> For now, the copy in the ethernet device private data is required for >> multi process support, the name is the how secondary process finds about >> primary process device. > > Yes it is in rte_eth_dev_attach_secondary(). > This secondary process forces us to write ugly data structures. > >> But for drivers there is no reason to use the copy in the ethernet >> device private data. > > Yes I agree. Probably. But it also depends on at what stage the driver is using the name and what information is printed. During probing I would expect the low-level device name to be printed. After probing the eth_dev PMD should use the user friendly device name. > There are probably other places where we can avoid using this field. > I see rte_eth_dev_get_name_by_port() and rte_eth_dev_get_port_by_name() > using rte_eth_dev_data[port].name. > >> This patch updates PMDs to use only rte_device->name. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> >
