From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas@monjalon.net>
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com
[66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30548D3C
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:44:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41])
by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B69420EC0;
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:44:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:44:36 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h=
cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to
:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender
:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=PJutX4rkenRTPpxhyAkN4XozHN
mPTog6pVk0UMfIQ5I=; b=P+3JqC6v7rmv1NQtO4a/Xusw9B6iu4TllZUS2uWqea
U1OSfj99nJ7awOsEaQzkaDKSb8SvF8GkO9DSvuT3/B5pTrCSk7V347QIRUM8apKL
FpqNo3VlPv7IUI98xCFF8Zqjza6tyuQ6fSKjLEXCv/Al8yx9cYqbZUHfebqMuAzT
I=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type
:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references
:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=PJutX4
rkenRTPpxhyAkN4XozHNmPTog6pVk0UMfIQ5I=; b=h+7kNuL/IIjzGOXBkc2Ti8
z1jlhC+p7vbZPdPsg+zgVCgJBMbdhPiA0ae/NnhS/QOQnTO31ErLONwDezTkgREu
7DwbI3+ueHcHahFyVWbUK5f1Ud/p1Uyjx9A7UtMHonrlfC2/rx3Xi7kAoCWTMQyk
CENNWLpS11dehXVNjN+UfWt4GIIeg+sj45ORY6FfmbPRXURRaLLWOgDUDNiEn4O7
3tpJJXzalMOOUN9iV6o9R1Um47UihOUM6vAO1P61AqU44JL2shz6Ku2xAoW/RynI
MpvwL3FL/LuuzuuKi1SUVQv9IMJCn0nBTEbM/3L1QoUKXc4n+iuvm4cqX41sMi3g
==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:1OXhWtDwx1lmbazwQ2NXGV-mH3bDR2pvl9QJCC7IQFxTRouRbOL8vg>
Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184])
by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1CCDAE47A0;
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 10:44:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
"Horton, Remy" <remy.horton@intel.com>, gaetan.rivet@6wind.com
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:44:33 +0200
Message-ID: <1766858.7hL0hTjUtK@xps>
In-Reply-To: <6c84cc1c-9ad4-11e5-f99f-1bc7152c7b14@intel.com>
References: <20180416130605.6509-1-declan.doherty@intel.com>
<2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258AEBD049D@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
<6c84cc1c-9ad4-11e5-f99f-1bc7152c7b14@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 6/9] ethdev: add common devargs parser
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:44:37 -0000
26/04/2018 16:28, Doherty, Declan:
> On 26/04/2018 1:03 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > From: Doherty, Declan
> >> +typedef int (*rte_eth_devargs_callback_t)(char *str, void *data);
> >> +
> >> +static int
> >> +rte_eth_devargs_tokenise(struct rte_kvargs *arglist, const char *str_in)
> >> +{
> >
> > I still think that if you'd like to extend rte_kvarrgs to be able to parse something like: "key=[val1,val2,...,valn]",
> > you have to make it generic kvargs ability and put it into librte_kvargs, not try to introduce your own new parser here.
> > Imagine that in addition to your 'port=[val1,val2, ..valn]' devargs string would contain some extra (let say device specific)
> > parameters.
> > What would happen, when PMD will try to use rte_kvargs_parse() on such string?
> > My understanding - it would fail, correct?
> >
> > As an alternative - as I remember rte_kvargs allows you to have multiple identical key, i.e: "key=val1,key=val2,...,key=valn".
> > Why not to use that way, if you don't want to introduce extra code in rte_kvargs?
> >
>
> Hey Konstantin, the rationale for keeping this independent from
> librte_kvargs was that it is likely that the implementation of parsing
> devarfs will change in the next release due the proposed rework on the
> whole devargs infrastructure. I hadn't considered the potential issue
> with rte_kvargs_parse() on string using the proposed syntax here. I'll
> send a patch for alignment with librte_kvargs for the next release
> candidate.
The new devargs infra will rely on librte_kvargs.
So improving kvargs is the right way here.