Hi Jan, > -----Original Message----- > From: jblu...@gmail.com [mailto:jblu...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan > Blunck > Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2017 10:27 PM > To: Tan, Jianfeng > Cc: dev; Richardson, Bruce; Ananyev, Konstantin; De Lara Guarch, Pablo; > Thomas Monjalon; y...@fridaylinux.org; Maxime Coquelin; Tetsuya Mukawa; > Yigit, Ferruh > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 09/12] ethdev: support attach vdev in > secondary process > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng....@intel.com> > wrote: > > When vdev driver requests an ethdev entry in secondary process, > > we will identify the correct entry in rte_eth_dev_data array > > and return the correct entry in the rte_eth_devices arrays. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng....@intel.com> > > --- > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_vdev.h | 26 +++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_vdev.h > b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_vdev.h > > index 4d2c3e2..460749b 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_vdev.h > > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev_vdev.h > > @@ -58,25 +58,29 @@ rte_eth_vdev_allocate(struct rte_vdev_device > *dev, size_t private_data_size) > > struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev; > > const char *name = rte_vdev_device_name(dev); > > > > - eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_allocate(name); > > - if (!eth_dev) > > - return NULL; > > - > > - if (private_data_size) { > > - eth_dev->data->dev_private = rte_zmalloc_socket(name, > > - private_data_size, RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE, > > - dev->device.numa_node); > > - if (!eth_dev->data->dev_private) { > > - rte_eth_dev_release_port(eth_dev); > > + if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) { > > + eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_allocate(name); > > + if (!eth_dev) > > return NULL; > > + > > + if (private_data_size) { > > + eth_dev->data->dev_private = > > rte_zmalloc_socket(name, > > + private_data_size, > > RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE, > > + dev->device.numa_node); > > + if (!eth_dev->data->dev_private) { > > + rte_eth_dev_release_port(eth_dev); > > + return NULL; > > + } > > } > > + } else { > > + eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_attach_secondary(name); > > I don't see the point why the secondary process should call > rte_eth_vdev_allocate() in the first place. The driver needs to setup > the IPC anyway so it should just call rte_eth_dev_attach_secondary() > instead. Hmm... make sense. Will fix it in the next version.
Thanks for the input. Thanks, Jianfeng
