From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6A25A93 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 20:38:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [107.15.76.160] (helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1b8tzA-00018R-Il; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 14:38:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 14:38:19 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: "Wiles, Keith" Cc: Arnon Warshavsky , Panu Matilainen , "Richardson, Bruce" , Thomas Monjalon , Yuanhan Liu , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Tan, Jianfeng" , Stephen Hemminger , Christian Ehrhardt , Olivier Matz Message-ID: <20160603183819.GD12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <20160602200837.GC12923@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20160603102943.GC16616@bricha3-MOBL3> <20160603110129.GB17812@bricha3-MOBL3> <20160603115048.GA12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <8CE01283-1E89-4302-BE7D-486975B43EF6@intel.com> <20160603174437.GC12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <62A67FEB-AE18-43B1-8D15-27F23D5C8A7D@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <62A67FEB-AE18-43B1-8D15-27F23D5C8A7D@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Spam-Status: No Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] Yet another option for DPDK options X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 18:38:31 -0000 On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:29:13PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > On 6/3/16, 12:44 PM, "Neil Horman" wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 04:04:14PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: > >> Sorry, I deleted all of the text as it was getting a bit long. > >> > >> Here are my thoughts as of now, which is a combination of many suggestions I read from everyone’s emails. I hope this is not too hard to understand. > >> > >> - Break out the current command line options out of the DPDK common code and move into a new lib. > >> - At this point I was thinking of keeping the rte_eal_init(args, argv) API and just have it pass the args/argv to the new lib to create the data storage. > >> - Maybe move the rte_eal_init() API to the new lib or keep it in the common eal code. Do not want to go hog wild. > >> - The rte_eal_init(args, argv) would then call to the new API rte_eal_initialize(void), which in turn queries the data storage. (still thinking here) > >These three items seem to be the exact opposite of my suggestion. The point of > >this change was to segregate the parsing of configuration away from the > >initalization dpdk using that configurtion. By keeping rte_eal_init in such a > >way that the command line is directly passed into it, you've not changed that > >implicit binding to command line options. > > Neil, > > You maybe reading the above wrong or I wrote it wrong, which is a high possibility. I want to move the command line parsing out of DPDK an into a library, but I still believe I need to provide some backward compatibility for ABI and to reduce the learning curve. The current applications can still call the rte_eal_init(), which then calls the new lib parser for dpdk command line options and then calls rte_eal_initialize() or move to the new API rte_eal_initialize() preceded by a new library call to parse the old command line args. At some point we can deprecate the rte_eal_init() if we think it is reasonable. > > > > >I can understand if you want to keep rte_eal_init as is for ABI purposes, but > >then you should create an rte_eal_init2(foo), where foo is some handle to in > >memory parsed configuration, so that applications can preform that separation. > > I think you describe what I had planned here. The rte_eal_initialize() routine is the new rte_eal_init2() API and the rte_eal_init() was only for backward compatibility was my thinking. I figured the argument to rte_eal_initialize() would be something to be decided, but it will mostly likely be some type of pointer to the storage. > > I hope that clears that up, but let me know. > yes, that clarifies your thinking, and I agree with it. Thank you! Neil > ++Keith > > > > >Neil > > > >> - The example apps args needs to be passed to the examples as is for now, then we can convert them one at a time if needed. > >> > >> - I would like to keep the storage of the data separate from the file parser as they can use the ‘set’ routines to build the data storage up. > >> - Keeping them split allows for new parsers to be created, while keeping the data storage from changing. > >> - The rte_cfg code could be modified to use the new configuration if someone wants to take on that task ☺ > >> > >> - Next is the data storage and how we can access the data in a clean simple way. > >> - I want to have some simple level of hierarchy in the data. > >> - Having a string containing at least two levels “primary:secondary”. > >> - Primary string is something like “EAL” or “Pktgen” or “testpmd” to divide the data storage into logical major groups. > >> - The primary allows us to have groups and then we can have common secondary strings in different groups if needed. > >> - Secondary string can be whatever the developer of that group would like e.g. simple “EAL:foobar”, two levels “testpmd:foo.bar” > >> > >> - The secondary string is treated as a single string if it has a hierarchy or not, but referencing a single value in the data storage. > >> - Key value pairs (KVP) or a hashmap data store. > >> - The key here is the whole string “EAL:foobar” not just “foobar” secondary string. > >> - If we want to have the two split I am ok with that as well meaning the API would be: > >> rte_map_get(mapObj, “EAL”, “foo.bar”); > >> rte_map_set(mapObj, “EAL”, “foo.bar”, value); > >> - Have the primary as a different section in the data store, would allow for dumping that section maybe easier, not sure. > >> - I am leaning toward > >> - Not going to try splitting up the string or parse it as it is up to the developer to make it unique in the data store. > >> - Use a code design to make the strings simple to use without having typos be a problem. > >> - Not sure what the design is yet, but I do not want to have to concat two string or split strings in the code. > >> > >> This is as far as I have gotten and got tired of typing ☺ > >> > >> I hope this will satisfy most everyone’s needs for now. > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> Keith > >> > >> > >> > > > > >