From: "Chilikin, Andrey" <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
"Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH] eal:Add new API for parsing args at rte_eal_init time
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 21:27:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AAC06825A3B29643AF5372F5E0DDF053350F01FE@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150604135542.GC24585@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Neil Horman
> Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2015 2:56 PM
> To: Wiles, Keith
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH] eal:Add new API for parsing args at
> rte_eal_init time
>
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 11:50:33AM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote:
> > Hi Stephen
> >
> > On 6/3/15, 7:12 PM, "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > >On Wed, 3 Jun 2015 13:49:53 -0500
> > >Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +/* Launch threads, called at application init() and parse app
> > >> +args. */ int rte_eal_init_parse(int argc, char **argv,
> > >> + int (*parse)(int, char **))
> > >> +{
> > >> + int ret;
> > >> +
> > >> + ret = rte_eal_init(argc, argv);
> > >> + if ((ret >= 0) && (parse != NULL)) {
> > >> + argc -= ret;
> > >> + argv += ret;
> > >
> > >This won't work C is call by value.
> >
> > I tested this routine with Pktgen (again), which has a number of
> > application options and it appears to work correctly. Can you explain
> > why this will not work?
> >
> > Regards,
> > ++Keith
> > >
> >
> >
>
> Stephen was thinking that your intent was to have argc, and argv modified at
> the call site of this function (i.e. if you called rte_eal_init_parse from main(),
> then after the call to rte_ela_init_parse, argc would be reduced by ret and argv
> would point forward in memory ret bytes in the main function, but they wont.
> It doesn't matter though, because you return ret, so the caller can do that
> movement themselves. As you note, it works.
>
> Note that if it was your intention to have argc and argv modified at the call site,
> then Stephen is right and this is broken, you need to modify the prototype to be:
> int rte_eal_init_parse(int *argc, char ***argv)
>
> and do a dereference when modifying the parameters so the change is seen at
> the call site.
>
> That said, I'm not sure theres much value in adding this to the API. For one, it
> implies that dpdk arguments need to come first on the command line. While
> all the example applications do that, theres no requirement that they do so,
> and this function silently implies that they have to, so any existing applications
> in the wild that violate that assumption are enjoined from using this
>
> It also doesn't really save any code. If we pick an example app (I'll us l2fwd-
> jobstats), We currently have this:
>
> /* init EAL */
> ret = rte_eal_init(argc, argv);
> if (ret < 0)
> rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid EAL arguments\n");
> argc -= ret;
> argv += ret;
>
> /* parse application arguments (after the EAL ones) */
> ret = l2fwd_parse_args(argc, argv);
> if (ret < 0)
> rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid L2FWD arguments\n");
>
> With your new API we would get this:
>
> ret = rte_eal_init_parse(argc, argv, l2fwd_parse_args)
> if (ret < 0)
> rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid arguments - not sure what\n");
>
> Its definately 5 fewer lines of source, but it doesn't save any execution
> instructions, and for the effort of that, you loose the ability to determine if it
> was a DPDK argument or an application argument that failed.
>
> Its not a bad addition, I'm just not sure its worth having to take on the
> additional API surface to include. I'd be more supportive if you could enhance
> the function to allow the previously mentioned before/after flexibiilty. Then we
> could just deprecate rte_eal_init as an API call entirely, and use this instead.
Before/after would be very useful, a lot of applications use only "-c" and "-n" EAL command line parameters and "-c" in many cases is redundant as application can calculate core mask from its own parameters, and "-n" just a required parameter which can be defaulted to a platform specific value. So in addition to rte_set_application_usage_hook() it would be nice to have some more general way of overwriting eal initialization parameters.
>
> Neil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-04 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-03 18:49 Keith Wiles
2015-06-03 19:24 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-06-03 19:43 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-06-04 0:12 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-06-04 11:50 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-06-04 13:55 ` Neil Horman
2015-06-04 14:27 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-06-04 14:43 ` David Marchand
2015-06-04 14:51 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-06-04 14:55 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-06-04 14:47 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-06-04 16:51 ` Thomas F Herbert
2015-06-04 21:27 ` Chilikin, Andrey [this message]
2015-06-05 6:01 ` Simon Kågström
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=AAC06825A3B29643AF5372F5E0DDF053350F01FE@IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=andrey.chilikin@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/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).