DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: DPDK configuration options
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:27:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F62D@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)

DPDK has many configuration options.

There are four levels of visibility:

1. Some are changed by passing command line options to meson.
2. Some are changed by modifying their values in config/rte_config.h.
3. Some are changed by adding them to config/rte_config.h, but you have to magically know of their existence; e.g. RTE_ENABLE_ASSERT, RTE_MALLOC_DEBUG and RTE_LIBRTE_MBUF_DEBUG.
4. Some are hidden away in drivers, typically driver specific options.

And many of the configuration options are not even documented anywhere in the code; they are just used by the code.

It seems the level of visibility is currently determined by how "exotic" the option is considered to be. I think this is the wrong criteria.

There's also a expectation that a person building DPDK doesn't have to modify config/rte_config.h. I think this is a false expectation; if you are qualified to build DPDK and tweak it along the way, you certainly understand how to modify a header file, and there is no good reason to pass simple configuration values (e.g. max_ethports, mbuf_refcnt_atomic and pkt_mbuf_headroom) 1:1 through meson.

Furthermore, configuration options should not be hidden away or spread all over the place. It makes them difficult to find and modify.

Optimally, we would have the same way of configuring DPDK as the Linux kernel.
But I don't see that happening anytime soon.
So, in the interim, we could use one big configuration file, as follows:

Options that are not candidates for automatic detection at build time should not be level 1, but level 2. (Automatic detection makes sense for e.g. max_lcores, so that should remain at level 1.)

All level 3 options should be moved to level 2. If there's a configuration option, it should be presented (and documented), not hidden away.

Similarly, level 4 options should be moved to level 2; perhaps except options in drivers' "base" directories (code shared by DPDK, Linux and/or other systems).

Each option should have a comment briefly describing what it does.


Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards,
-Morten Brørup



             reply	other threads:[~2024-08-14  9:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-14  9:27 Morten Brørup [this message]
2024-08-14 11:22 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-08-14 15:04   ` Morten Brørup

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F62D@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
    --to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).