Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/ring: create vdev from PMD specific API

2017-06-12 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 6/12/2017 3:19 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:08:31PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> On 6/12/2017 2:25 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/ring: create vdev from PMD specific API

2017-06-12 Thread Bruce Richardson
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 03:08:31PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 6/12/2017 2:25 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > >> When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction > >> it is missing the virtual device creation d

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/ring: create vdev from PMD specific API

2017-06-12 Thread Ferruh Yigit
On 6/12/2017 2:25 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction >> it is missing the virtual device creation done by EAL vdev. >> >> And this makes eth_dev unusable exact same as o

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/ring: create vdev from PMD specific API

2017-06-12 Thread Bruce Richardson
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:51:19PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction > it is missing the virtual device creation done by EAL vdev. > > And this makes eth_dev unusable exact same as other PMDs used, because > of some missing fields, l

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/ring: create vdev from PMD specific API

2017-06-09 Thread Ferruh Yigit
When ring PMD created via PMD specific API instead of EAL abstraction it is missing the virtual device creation done by EAL vdev. And this makes eth_dev unusable exact same as other PMDs used, because of some missing fields, like rte_device->name. Now API creates a virtual device and sets proper