On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:53:11AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 27/10/2017 10:19, Tan, Jianfeng: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > > 27/10/2017 03:06, Jianfeng Tan: > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/drivers/bus/vdev/rte_bus_vdev_version.map > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ > > > > +DPDK_17.11 { > > > > + global: > > > > + > > > > + rte_vdev_init; > > > > + rte_vdev_register; > > > > + rte_vdev_uninit; > > > > + rte_vdev_unregister; > > > > +}; > > > > > > It should not be needed to export the driver ops. > > > > rte_vdev_register/unregister are needed by vdev PMDs, which are needed to > > export, isn't it? > > Yes you're right, I overlooked it. > > > And for rte_vdev_init()/rte_vdev_uninit(), do you mean we all change to use > > rte_eal_dev_attach()/detach()? > > rte_vdev_init() is mostly used in tests. > I changed my mind, you can keep it. > Maybe it would be clearer to rename rte_vdev.h to rte_bus_vdev.h > to mimic what was done for PCI. So rte_bus_*.h are mainly for PMDs > and not to be used by common applications. > > > > Please can you try to make it private? > > > > Even we want to make it private, I think it needs deprecation notice, which > > we can further improved for the next release? > > Yes we can revise usage of rte_vdev_init(), rte_eal_dev_attach() and > rte_eal_hotplug_add() in the next release. > > Gaetan, do you have any comment?
Well, as stated before, I agree that deprecating attach / detach seems good to me. The hotplug API supersedes it and the only difference from a user PoV is the artificial restriction to vdev and PCI buses. -- Gaëtan Rivet 6WIND
