[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/8] net/mlx5: add mlx5 Linux specific file with getter functions

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 6/9/2020 9:40 AM, Ophir Munk wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
> Please see inline
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:20 PM
>> To: Ophir Munk <ophirmu at mellanox.com>; dev at dpdk.org; Matan Azrad
>> <matan at mellanox.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at mellanox.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/8] net/mlx5: add mlx5 Linux specific file
>> with getter functions
>>
>> On 6/3/2020 4:05 PM, Ophir Munk wrote:
>>> 'ctx' type (field in 'struct mlx5_ctx_shared') is changed from 'struct
>>> ibv_context *' to 'void *'.  'ctx' members which are verbs dependent
>>> (e.g. device_name) will be accessed through getter functions which are
>>> added to a new file under Linux directory: linux/mlx5_os.c.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ophir Munk <ophirmu at mellanox.com>
>>> Acked-by: Matan Azrad <matan at mellanox.com>
>>
>> <...>
>>
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>>> + * Copyright 2015 6WIND S.A.
>>> + * Copyright 2020 Mellanox Technologies, Ltd  */
>>
>> Just to double check if '6WIND' is copy/paste error in this new file?
>>
> 
> Some functions were moved from file mlx5.c (with 6WIND copyright) to this file
> and renamed. 
> Should 6WIND copyright be kept or removed in this file (mlx5_os.c)?

No. I just want to confirm this is not just copy/paste error, which happens on
new files, but done intentionally. As you did this intentionally, that is good.

> 
>> <...>
>>
>>> @@ -677,13 +677,14 @@ mlx5_dev_shared_handler_install(struct
>> mlx5_dev_ctx_shared *sh)
>>>  	int flags;
>>>
>>>  	sh->intr_handle.fd = -1;
>>> -	flags = fcntl(sh->ctx->async_fd, F_GETFL);
>>> -	ret = fcntl(sh->ctx->async_fd, F_SETFL, flags | O_NONBLOCK);
>>> +	flags = fcntl(((struct ibv_context *)sh->ctx)->async_fd, F_GETFL);
>>> +	ret = fcntl(((struct ibv_context *)sh->ctx)->async_fd,
>>> +		    F_SETFL, flags | O_NONBLOCK);
>>
>> As far as I understand you are trying to remove to the dependency to ibverbs,
>> at least in root level, linux/x.c will have that dependency. (I assume this is for
>> Windows support) The 'mlx5_os_get_ctx_device_path()' wrapper seems can
>> work for it but what is the point of above usage, that you explicitly cast "void
>> *" to "(struct ibv_context *)", so you still keep the ibv dependency?
> 
> The reason for keeping an explicit cast for async_fd (and not creating a new getter API)
> is that this code snippet will be moved under linux in next commits where no getter function is needed.
> I wanted to avoid adding a getter function here and then remove it in a follow up commit. 
> 

Make sense if it is removed later, thanks for clarification.