From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2F40A0577; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 15:24:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856362BE2; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 15:24:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF6742B86 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 15:24:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0592C96; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 09:24:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 06 Apr 2020 09:24:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=9kM19YFoyXaHQdTQdEosEUHIJGV3uLBpcYxHkxWK3no=; b=rMXzJ25DYvVd pEiqFw6BBydvpH9eNNxK47/qqh5ccHiEp6tsjCxUadKhjd9WMTwSofnYR7lsasgH Vbi5x6sl15KmrgfaLYjNFEBFhMXzP8jN0iD9YmumzebFAfK08EgEsPNeagmS4KEU 9l96tPJy2fBw3yGfNgdcbXCG+c4kMBw= 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-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=9kM19YFoyXaHQdTQdEosEUHIJGV3uLBpcYxHkxWK3 no=; b=Cu9rFwnNe4e6G4Y5XT20FwcqiLPoLxOJQD9d1rxIK6fh/s6uGB4xQyW/5 7s9D3K3jX6V6xKRR04Jhonynult1DT8HVwVJ85oJt1FDy+t0OkqIM0UAw9lhRmll zNWZ6DdFUs456ExIxQ887RVeFOjAnsZVS1/6aR3/Y/lGikSKytqhJDIKZsDXmKE4 qZX0MXImZ6xkR0LLtiZ+/XHFmAGxQPslM2KoLl0/aN7pQJpj49BvrzHcJCOJLONC 2EITeqIcfQA8FZxdWQrctL+aS0QliwPzc3BJZFPsFbM9oTS2KKaeCkCfyFrcbxHY srdviYSLFPj4GcRfXrvWnNw6yQIwA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudefgdehkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9D102328005A; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 09:24:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Fady Bader , Dmitry Kozlyuk Cc: Tal Shnaiderman , "dev@dpdk.org" Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 15:24:26 +0200 Message-ID: <38689326.XIDecUUvMD@xps> In-Reply-To: <20200406153734.40cb5c5a@Sovereign> References: <20200406153734.40cb5c5a@Sovereign> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] questions about Windows basic memory management patch X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 06/04/2020 14:37, Dmitry Kozlyuk: > > Lastly, in the patch you implemented functions that were common for Linux and FreeBSD and in order to use them in Windows (e.g. eal_file_truncate that replaced ftruncate) and you got a duplicate code for Linux and FreeBSD, how can we solve this duplication ? > > In v2 I'm going to create lib/librte_eal/posix subdirectory and move such > code there. I expect more code to end up there eventually, for example, > dynamic library loading. This possibility was among motivations for EAL > directory split. Indeed it was the motivation. I think /unix/ is a better directory name than /posix/ Maybe I'm wrong but I had the feeling some interfaces are common between Linux and FreeBSD while not part of POSIX standard. Comments are welcome to help taking the right decision. > There're another duplication that worries me: copy & paste from Linux EAL in > eal_malloc.c and eal_memory.c initialization. However, it this can't be > helped, I'd rather leave it be for now and reconsider it when implementing > advanced memory management. There are a lot of copy/paste in EAL which can be refactored. Any help here is welcome.