[dpdk-dev] Clarification for eth_driver changes

David Marchand david.marchand at 6wind.com
Mon Nov 14 10:07:46 CET 2016


On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:16 PM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com> wrote:
> On 11/10/2016 11:05 AM, Shreyansh Jain wrote:
>> On Thursday 10 November 2016 01:46 PM, David Marchand wrote:
>>> Do we really need to keep a eth_driver ?
>>
>> No. As you have rightly mentioned below (as well as in your Jan'16
>> post), it is a mere convenience.
>
> Isn't it good to separate the logic related which bus device connected
> and what functionality it provides. Because these two can be flexible:
>
> device -> virtual_bus -> ethernet_functionality
> device -> pci_bus     -> crypto_functionality
> device -> x_bus       -> y_function

"a device is linked to a bus" (fine)
"a bus knows what a device does" (?!)
Not sure I follow you.


-- 
David Marchand


More information about the dev mailing list