From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
Cc: "Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK namespace
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 13:26:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160406052656.GT3080@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKy9EB3wT0nXQ7P8nuUY2hJ=Kdyip7jCP9ypka=EVGO2CB_HKg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 05:31:22PM +0300, Arnon Warshavsky wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe@intel.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2016 2:57 PM
> > > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] DPDK namespace
> > >
> > > DPDK is going to be more popular in Linux distributions.
> > > It means people will have some DPDK files in their /usr/include and some
> > DPDK
> > > libraries on their system.
> > >
> > > Let's imagine someone trying to compile an application which needs
> > > rte_ethdev.h. He has to figure out that this "rte header" is provided by
> > the DPDK.
> > > Hopefully it will be explained on StackOverflow that RTE stands for DPDK.
> > > Then someone else will try to run a binary without having installed the
> > DPDK
> > > libraries. The linker will require libethdev.so (no prefix here).
> > > StackOverflow will probably have another good answer (among wrong ones):
> > > "Hey Sherlock Holmes, have you tried to install the DPDK library?"
> > > Followed by an insight: "You know, the DPDK naming is weird..."
> > > And we could continue the story with developers having some naming clash
> > > because of some identifiers not prefixed at all.
> > >
> > > The goal of this email is to get some feedback on how important it is to
> > fix the
> > > DPDK namespace.
> > >
> > > If there is enough agreement that we should do something, I suggest to
> > > introduce the "dpdk_" prefix slowly and live with both "rte_" and "dpdk_"
> > > during some time.
> > > We could start using the new prefix for the new APIs (example: crypto)
> > or when
> > > there is a significant API break (example: mempool).
> > >
> > > Opinions welcome!
> > I don't have an opinion on how important it is to fix the namespace,
> > though it does seem like a good idea.
> > However if it's to be done, in my opinion it should be completed quickly
> > or will just cause more confusion.
> > So if rte_cryptoxxx becomes dpdk_cryptoxxx all other libraries should
> > follow in next release or two, with
> > the resulting ABI compatibility handling. Maybe with dual naming handled
> > for several releases, but a
> > clear end date when all are converted.
> > Else there will be many years with a mix of rte_ and dpdk_
> >
> >
>
> Googling rte functions or error codes usually takes you to dpdk dev email
> archive so I don't think it is that much difficult to figure out where rte
> comes from.
> Other than that , except for my own refactoring pains when replacing a dpdk
> version, I do not see a major reason why not.
> If Going for dpdk_ prefix, I agree with the quick death approach.
+1: it's a bit weird to keep both, especially for a long while, that
every time we turn a rte_ prefix to dpdk_ prefix, we break applications.
Instead of breaking applications many times, I'd prefer to break once.
Therefore, applications could do a simple global rte_ -> dpdk_ substitute:
it doesn't sound that painful then.
And here are few more comments:
- we should add rte_/dpdk_ prefix to all public structures as well.
I'm thinking we are doing well here. I'm just aware that vhost lib
does a bad job, which is something I proposed to fix in next release.
- If we do the whole change once, I'd suggest to do it ASAP when this
release is over.
It should be a HUGE change that touches a lot of code, if we do it
later, at a stage that a lot of patches for new features have been
made or sent out, all of them need rebase. That'd be painful.
--yliu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-06 5:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-05 13:56 Thomas Monjalon
2016-04-05 14:13 ` Trahe, Fiona
2016-04-05 14:31 ` Trahe, Fiona
2016-04-05 14:31 ` Arnon Warshavsky
2016-04-06 5:26 ` Yuanhan Liu [this message]
2016-04-06 12:07 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-04-06 12:34 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-04-06 14:36 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-04-06 20:21 ` Dave Neary
2016-04-07 8:22 ` Marc
2016-04-11 16:10 ` Don Provan
2016-04-11 16:28 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-04-06 12:41 ` Jay Rolette
2016-04-06 12:51 ` Mcnamara, John
2016-04-07 9:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-04-07 9:33 ` Panu Matilainen
2016-04-07 10:16 ` Marc Sune
2016-04-07 11:51 ` [dpdk-dev] On DPDK ABI policy Panu Matilainen
2016-04-07 21:52 ` Matthew Hall
2016-04-08 8:29 ` Marc Sune
2016-04-08 8:47 ` Marc Sune
2016-04-07 21:48 ` [dpdk-dev] DPDK namespace Matthew Hall
2016-04-07 22:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160406052656.GT3080@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com \
--to=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnon@qwilt.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fiona.trahe@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).