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 396C4457BF; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:28:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEA2B40BA0; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:28:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FBC4066F for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:28:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com (smartserver.smartsharesys.local [192.168.4.10]) by dkmailrelay1.smartsharesystems.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5565A2099B for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:28:02 +0200 (CEST) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: DPDK configuration options Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 11:27:58 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F62D@smartserver.smartshare.dk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: DPDK configuration options Thread-Index: AdruLEAaRQrlAwovSRWlWrZwAmPFpw== From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= To: 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 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 Br=F8rup