On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:08:31PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 6/12/2017 2:25 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > >> When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction > >> it is missing the virtual device creation done by EAL vdev. > >> > >> And this makes eth_dev unusable exact same as other PMDs used, because > >> of some missing fields, like rte_device->name. > >> > >> Now API creates a virtual device and sets proper fields, not all, and it > >> still won't be linked in the virtual device list eal keeps track. But > >> makes PMD usable in usual manner. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > >> --- > > > > Is a better fix not to have this API call into the EAL to create the > > vdev and add it to the lists as with other vdevs? [If it makes it easier, > > the extra parameters passed in to the library-local function can be > > saved in a context that can be accessed when the EAL calls back into the > > driver, rather than having to flatten them out into devargs and re-parsed > > again.] > > Let me send the patch as suggested. > > Using EAL API is better idea I think, but overall this ring PMD looked > like hack after changes. > > Please check the latest patch, if we want to keep ring PMD API, perhaps > we should postpone removing drv_name patch. > The new patch looks ok to me. I actually don't think it looks that hacked together. :-)
/Bruce
