From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65002952 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 13:07:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Mar 2017 04:07:29 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,236,1484035200"; d="scan'208";a="55459547" Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.3]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2017 04:07:28 -0800 Received: from irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com (10.108.20.5) by IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 12:07:26 +0000 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.173]) by irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.175]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 3 Mar 2017 12:07:26 +0000 From: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" To: "Legacy, Allain (Wind River)" , Yuanhan Liu , "Richardson, Bruce" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River)" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] cfgfile: configurable comment character Thread-Index: AQHSk4tgAm80mLhvyUurDX68XH1fJKGCC6+AgAA+aICAAKeiQIAACoGAgAAHsWA= Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 12:07:25 +0000 Message-ID: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D8912652758220@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1488482971-170522-1-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <1488482971-170522-2-git-send-email-allain.legacy@windriver.com> <20170302211015.GA18940@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170303005337.GB18844@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D8912652758102@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <70A7408C6E1BFB41B192A929744D85238A75B22B@ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com> In-Reply-To: <70A7408C6E1BFB41B192A929744D85238A75B22B@ALA-MBC.corp.ad.wrs.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMjdmMzA4YTItYWYyOS00NThlLWE5ODMtNjk5ODYzOGM2NDZjIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjIuMTEuMCIsIlRydXN0ZWRMYWJlbEhhc2giOiJrNm9JQWpyNmxFc1RaRjdQUHVaR3FqVE1neFFaZXN2ZWNUeFwvcXd3MzFsMD0ifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] cfgfile: configurable comment character 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 12:07:30 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Legacy, Allain [mailto:Allain.Legacy@windriver.com] > Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 11:31 AM > To: Dumitrescu, Cristian ; Yuanhan Liu > ; Richardson, Bruce > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River) > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] cfgfile: configurable comment charact= er >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com] > > Possible options that I see: > > 1. Add a new parameters argument to the load functions (e.g. struct > > cfgfile_params *p), whit the comment char as one (and currently only) f= ield > > of this struct. Drawbacks: API change that might have to be announced o= ne > > release before the actual API change. >=20 > I would prefer this option as it provides more flexibility. We can leave= the > existing API as is and a wrapper that accepts additional parameters. > Something like the following (with implementations in the .c obviously ra= ther > than inline the header like I have it here). There are several examples = of this > pattern already in the dpdk (i.e., ring APIs, mempool APIs, etc.) where w= e > use a common function invoked by higher level functions that pass in > additional parameters to customize behavior. >=20 > struct rte_cfgfile *_rte_cfgfile_load(const char *filename, > const struct rte_cfgfile_params > *params); >=20 > struct rte_cfgfile *rte_cfgfile_load(const char *filename, int flags) > { > struct rte_cfgfile_params params; >=20 > rte_cfgfile_set_default_params(¶ms); > params |=3D flags; > return _rte_cfgfile_load(filename, ¶ms); > } >=20 > struct rte_cfgfile *rte_cfgfile_load_with_params(const char *filename, > const struct > rte_cfgfile_params *params) > { > return _rte_cfgfile_load(filename, params); > } Regardless of the approaches 1. or 2., we must control the acceptable set o= f chars for the comment separator, and the way to do this is through enum/f= lags. Both approaches can support this. Therefore, IMO the separator char is not = enough to justify approach 1. I would only go for approach 1 if there are s= ome other parameters that we could consider adding to the load function now= or later. Do you see any?