From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B13A0543; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 16:46:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA8EE40222; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 16:46:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C23840150 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 16:46:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1086) id 5A8F320C154B; Mon, 13 Jun 2022 07:46:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 5A8F320C154B DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1655131570; bh=VE1TggBDXl3j+W/gADtN1i2BuxPgsgt2Pa2Bq7vtmoI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kNyuLM/K0lphK1c9tFkxVmV5dABFmHNjbmbvU5GJhAk3mUkoNpjHg1k1stQw+v3Gj 73tac7jpUmflL8wLokihiS8fcqpReoNtwxTZoGHquj7SXXNEmv7Crnffc6yYfwdYB7 j7UUH9e/dCyRJUv5dWE6x1SZhW6JSRVT26QRDk7M= Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 07:46:10 -0700 From: Tyler Retzlaff To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com, junx.dong@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] config: remove explicit undef of unset values Message-ID: <20220613144610.GB29682@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <20211216111430.699717-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:54:33AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:14:30AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > Rather than explicitly clearing any setting of undefined values in our > > rte_config.h file, it's better to instead just add a comment that the > > value is not set. Using a comment allows the user to set the value using > > CFLAGS or similar mechanism without the config file clearing the value > > again. > > > > The text used " is not set" is modelled after the kernel approach > > of doing the same thing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson > > --- > > > > Although DPDK coding convention forbids use of "//" for comments, using > > regular C comment style makes the config settings less clear, as they can > > be confused with regular comments in the file. Using "//" makes them stand > > out better, so I prefer it. However, if others feel strongly, they can be > > changed to standard. > > > > Note: this is a resubmission of patch [1] which was part of a rejected > > series. However, the reasons for rejection - values in config being out > > of sync with those used for building apps - are less relevant for > > many, if not all, of these setting, so I believe the benefits for > > testing outweigh the potential downsides. If any setting is likely > > problematic, I can keep the explicit undef for that case in a new patch > > version. > > > > [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20200903144942.671870-2-bruce.richardson@intel.com/ Acked-by: Tyler Retzlaff