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 2960DA052F; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 18:45:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B691C043; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 18:45:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5183D1C036 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 18:45:00 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580319899; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=wClL+hTfMlmHEZcSQaD44Rfb/C6AJmlUAN/M8cVu/fY=; b=ULFIWhybg81jbiE3wifpH/JVQotJ49ON6HpvrJuDvNXzrolGwWMfT0slqNEQxFFUT9wbbP oQyxTqw2LrDf3O3evi+z0OaSwtiIQFpUH3ezCjESIwsQV83Jo7Q5HA6NLmvSPpPDjuUtk6 wDcZtr0jm36I2kzd/ngbUrf8QpGXIkQ= Received: from mail-vs1-f70.google.com (mail-vs1-f70.google.com [209.85.217.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-4-lqCMCDO-MEyqgiuyQzDwkw-1; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 12:44:55 -0500 Received: by mail-vs1-f70.google.com with SMTP id g27so141111vsb.21 for ; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:44:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1WK1QUxQI87dGSRVJz+FSXkcJ0x33OEWEYeB2BwTV58=; b=iriRVPFIF7ZOiw/ikEr/qlGGXKxoWLkIMABAJ+wlA72kG3APQBtioEcJfGQZgf7zXu Px0byScOY+vJRiMh8ZujSsffTcpCuLwwYZgrU+/FbHJRIm7DSpHrf1zlHsnRYzpUAhbx 0JaklBFML1UtQM6TOz/04DPFnjJkVwa/joFhFtzHvY6wmLns9zsUMXj8lA834NzDZeGa 8S0jZyjDwSZo6/JOanb7sVy7x/CXI96h83TVj/lpg5W+qPXbioyat5mbJUlgkQ4bfKLA s5OTW3OB2LxN83VfXReSI6yTxbEB9cB4FjpitvmGHhRYzeEpNZInQ9E0q3tLBAKikmqv Pmgw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUgRP/pngfxdWsBhmcV/eiQwEOZEJ4/rXQ3ESwGOvF3ss+GUOCE +XdortavwRLXkhXP036GcJ9WDW8B6X778nrfe44TUrv88FHhsGAZtHBsMr0tcC8X6vDdcc/aNla Z6OXro+zbZM0jmOwAYEQ= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b303:: with SMTP id a3mr398085vsm.141.1580319895276; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:44:55 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw6wikb8MkGNgQkKN0cywpF6h8HvEjcaCJ1IBEAvdLybFDpakoiG3/VzECBSDIlvBnX7ctVEhpD1llcPsBJ9LI= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b303:: with SMTP id a3mr398070vsm.141.1580319895000; Wed, 29 Jan 2020 09:44:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1580121053-26083-1-git-send-email-hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com> <1580121053-26083-3-git-send-email-hariprasad.govindharajan@intel.com> <1689bec2-91f3-77cd-8604-f7123023b109@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1689bec2-91f3-77cd-8604-f7123023b109@intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 18:44:43 +0100 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit , Thomas Monjalon Cc: Hariprasad Govindharajan , dev , Stephen Hemminger X-MC-Unique: lqCMCDO-MEyqgiuyQzDwkw-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eal: add eal_parse_optionlist to parse user input 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" On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 6:35 PM Ferruh Yigit wrote= : > On 1/27/2020 10:30 AM, Hariprasad Govindharajan wrote: > > In current version, there is a function which parses > > the corelist based on user value. A new generic > > function eal_parse_optionlist is added which will > > parse corelist as well as similar user input so > > that we can use it as a public API too. > > > > Signed-off-by: Hariprasad Govindharajan > > Hi David, > > Overall this patchset is to add '--portlist' command to testpmd and remov= e > existing 64 port limitation. > > And in this patch re-uses the exiting parser function in eal and converts= it to > API, question is if eal is good place to have this API, what do you think= about it? Exporting string parsers from the EAL has little value. Ok we avoid code duplication (and I can see other places in the tree where it might be used), but in the end we will have to maintain this API in the ABI when it enters the stable ABI. I am for avoiding this. --=20 David Marchand