On 28-Jun-18 12:45 PM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Zhang, Qi Z
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 7:27 PM
To: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh
<ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H
<benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender
<narender.vang...@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device as first
-----Original Message-----
From: Burakov, Anatoly
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 5:41 PM
To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org;
Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh
<ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H
<benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender
<narender.vang...@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device as
first
On 28-Jun-18 10:29 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Burakov, Anatoly
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 5:25 PM
To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>;
dev@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>;
Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; Shelton, Benjamin H
<benjamin.h.shel...@intel.com>; Vangati, Narender
<narender.vang...@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/19] ethdev: support attach private device
as first
On 28-Jun-18 2:52 AM, Qi Zhang wrote:
When attach a private device from secondary as the first one, we
need to make sure rte_eth_dev_shared_data is initialized, the
patch add necessary IPC for secondary to inform primary to do
initialization.
Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>
---
Does this mean hotplug is broken before this patch? Can it be moved
earlier?
Basically patch 4,5,6 depends on patch 3, they have no dependency
each
other.
So... is that a yes? :)
Yes, 3 ,6,4, 5 is better, will re-order
Apologies, actually patch 6 depends on patch 5, which build the secondary to
primary request channel, so current sequence is necessary.
OK, we can leave it as is then.
--
Thanks,
Anatoly
