[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-19 Thread David Marchand
Jan, On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Jan Viktorin wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:11:56 +0100 > David Marchand wrote: >> Ok, so what you propose is something like this ? > > I've expressed my basic understanding of this topic in the RFC patch set > yesterday (as you know). > >> >> - keep rte_

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-19 Thread Jan Viktorin
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 22:11:56 +0100 David Marchand wrote: > Jan, > > I was waiting for some others feedbacks before going into the code. > Glad to see you already tried this. Of course... I think, it's better to have a particular code (if possible) to talk about ;). It is quite difficult to see

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-18 Thread David Marchand
Jan, I was waiting for some others feedbacks before going into the code. Glad to see you already tried this. On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Jan Viktorin wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:38:16 +0100 > David Marchand wrote: >> - no need for a rte_pci_driver reference in rte_pci_device, since w

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-18 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2016-01-16 16:53, David Marchand: > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jan Viktorin > wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:38:16 +0100 > > David Marchand wrote: > >> Here is a proposal of a big cleanup in ethdev (cryptodev would have to > >> follow) and eal structures. [...] > >> ABI is most likely

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-18 Thread David Marchand
Hello Declan, On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Declan Doherty wrote: > In your proposal above, having an bus type enumeration in the rte_device > which specifies the bus type might be simpler than having to parse a > specific name formatting. This is not simpler. This is useless afaics. "upper"

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-18 Thread Declan Doherty
On 14/01/16 10:38, David Marchand wrote: > Hello all, > > Here is a proposal of a big cleanup in ethdev (cryptodev would have to > follow) and eal structures. > This is something I wanted to do for quite some time and the arrival of > a new bus makes me think we need it. > > This is an alternativ

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-16 Thread David Marchand
Hello Jan, On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Jan Viktorin wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:38:16 +0100 > David Marchand wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Here is a proposal of a big cleanup in ethdev (cryptodev would have to >> follow) and eal structures. >> This is something I wanted to do for quite

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-14 Thread Jan Viktorin
Hello David, nice to see that the things are moving... On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:38:16 +0100 David Marchand wrote: > Hello all, > > Here is a proposal of a big cleanup in ethdev (cryptodev would have to > follow) and eal structures. > This is something I wanted to do for quite some time and the

[dpdk-dev] Proposal for a big eal / ethdev cleanup

2016-01-14 Thread David Marchand
Hello all, Here is a proposal of a big cleanup in ethdev (cryptodev would have to follow) and eal structures. This is something I wanted to do for quite some time and the arrival of a new bus makes me think we need it. This is an alternative to what Jan proposed [1]. ABI is most likely broken wi