Hello Pablo, On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 08:44:31AM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote: > Hi Gaetan, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Gaëtan Rivet > > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 3:32 PM > > To: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 00/14] Move PCI away from the EAL > > > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 03:19:31PM +0100, Doherty, Declan wrote: > > > On 18/09/2017 10:31 AM, Gaetan Rivet wrote: > > > >Hi all, > > > > > > > >Here is a new version of the PCI bus move out of the EAL. > > > > > > > >The EAL PCI implementation is divided in two parts: > > > > > > > > - librte_pci: library offering helpers to handle PCI objects > > > > - librte_bus_pci: bus driver for PCI devices > > > > > > > >This allows other libraries / tools to use PCI elements (location, > > > >mappings, parsing operations, etc) without forcing a dependency on a > > bus driver. > > > > > > > >The latter should not have to export helpers that others might need. > > > >It is focused on defining the rte_pci_device, rte_pci_driver objects > > > >and their handling. > > > > > > > >The cryptodev library has hard dependencies on rte_pci_devices (used > > > >by generic probe function). Other similar libs (ether and eventdev) > > > >avoided the issue by inlining such functions and expecting users to > > > >include the relevant headers once the PCI bus has already been built. > > > > > > > >@Declan: > > > >I proposed a solution that would avoid inlining those functions, > > > >which does not feel right. Let me know what you think of it or if you > > > >think of a better solution. I think it would be best to have > > > >cryptodev completely independent from PCI / vdev as far as the lib in > > > >concerned (the vdev bus will move as well). > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Gaetan, apologies for the delay in getting back to you on this, I > > > had been looking at this but got sidelined onto other issues before > > > usersapce and I'm only getting back to it now. I think that while your > > > solution works it just highlights the dependency which probably > > > shouldn't be there between the cryptodev library and PCI devices. I've > > > had a look, and the functions in the cryptodev which you moved don't > > > really provide that much useful functionality. I done some testing and > > > completely removed them and just update the QAT PMD which is the only > > > crypto PMD which was using them and it seems much cleaner to me. I'll > > > push a patch for this change later today and it will allow you to drop > > > the patch "cryptodev: move PCI specific helpers to drivers/crypto" from > > this set. > > > > > > Regards > > > Declan > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Declan, > > > > All right, seems good from my PoV. I will rebase onto your patch once it is > > sent. > > > > Could you take a look at Declan's patchset and tell him what you think? > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-October/079827.html > > It might be a bit late, but if we think it is a better approach for cryptodev, > we could avoid creating a new PCI folder under drivers/crypto. > > Thanks! > Pablo >
Thanks for the heads up :) I was working with a stand-in patch on my PCI move series, I will use yours instead and see if I have any problem. I am bound to send a new version soon, if all is fine I will add the dependency on your series. -- Gaëtan Rivet 6WIND
