> From: Saleem, Shiraz <shiraz.saleem@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 2:43 PM
> To: Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Kirsher, Jeffrey T
> <jeffrey.t.kirsher@xxxxxxxxx>; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Ismail, Mustafa <mustafa.ismail@xxxxxxxxx>; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; nhorman@xxxxxxxxxx; sassmann@xxxxxxxxxx;
> jgg@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v4 10/25] RDMA/irdma: Add driver framework
> definitions
>
> [..]
>
> > > +static int irdma_devlink_reload_up(struct devlink *devlink,
> > > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) {
> > > + struct irdma_dl_priv *priv = devlink_priv(devlink);
> > > + union devlink_param_value saved_value;
> > > + const struct virtbus_dev_id *id = priv->vdev->matched_element;
> >
> > Like irdma_probe(), struct iidc_virtbus_object *vo is accesible for the given
> priv.
> > Please use struct iidc_virtbus_object for any sharing between two drivers.
> > matched_element modification inside the virtbus match() function and
> > accessing pointer to some driver data between two driver through this
> > matched_element is not appropriate.
>
> We can possibly avoid matched_element and driver data look up here.
> But fundamentally, at probe time (see irdma_gen_probe) the irdma driver
> needs to know which generation type of vdev we bound to. i.e. i40e or ice ?
> since we support both.
> And based on it, extract the driver specific virtbus device object, i.e
> i40e_virtbus_device vs iidc_virtbus_object and init that device.
>
> Accessing driver_data off the vdev matched entry in irdma_virtbus_id_table
> is how we know this generation info and make the decision.
>
If there is single irdma driver for two different virtbus device types, it is better to have two instances of virtbus_register_driver() with different matching string/id.
So based on the probe(), it will be clear with virtbus device of interest got added.
This way, code will have clear separation between two device types.
