From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B4ECA046B
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:40:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ABAD3798;
	Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:40:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142E534F0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 14:40:40 +0200 (CEST)
X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58])
 by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 28 Jun 2019 05:40:40 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,427,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="153361117"
Received: from vyashin-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO
 bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com) ([10.252.21.39])
 by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 28 Jun 2019 05:40:38 -0700
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:40:35 +0100
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Message-ID: <20190628124035.GA347@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20190529154132.49955-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com>
 <20190529154132.49955-4-bruce.richardson@intel.com>
 <CAJFAV8xm0wSqHQb-DWpFPYFxYOGRd7BRjEaeEEoXaCSB5S4tBw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJFAV8xm0wSqHQb-DWpFPYFxYOGRd7BRjEaeEEoXaCSB5S4tBw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] eal: allow checking CPU flags by name
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://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 03:22:14PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
>    On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:42 PM Bruce Richardson
>    <[1]bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>      Rather than using enum values for CPU flags, which means the symbols
>      don't
>      exist on other architectures, provide a flag lookup by name,
>      allowing us to
>      unconditionally check for a CPU flag.
> 
>    Did you consider passing a string for the CPU architecture rather than
>    an enum?
>    It would have to be compared to RTE_ARCH in
>    rte_cpu_get_flagname_enabled.
>    Or to accomodate with x86_64/i686, this could be a cpu arch family.
>    This avoids adding a new C type that seems quite limited wrt its uses.
>    --
>    David Marchand
>

I'm not sure I really see the value in having string names for the
architecture values, I think it would be a lot more clunky to manage rather
than having an enum value. The key difference vs the flags is that the
flags are only valid per-architecture while the architecture defines can be
globally valid, and secondly there is a finite, and small, number of
architectures compared to the number of flags supported.

If you feel strongly about it I can investigate it, but I'm not sure I see
the value in doing so right now if the only benefit is avoiding the enum.

/Bruce