Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] eal: add new rte color definition

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

17/12/2018 19:51, Dumitrescu, Cristian:
> From: Pattan, Reshma
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > From: Dumitrescu, Cristian
> > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_color.h
> > > > > > +enum rte_color {
> > > > > > +	RTE_COLOR_GREEN = 0, /**< Green */
> > > > > > +	RTE_COLOR_YELLOW, /**< Yellow */
> > > > > > +	RTE_COLOR_RED, /**< Red */
> > > > > > +	RTE_COLORS /**< Number of colors */ };
> > > > >
> > > > > Does it really belong to EAL?
> > > > > Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > Why not?
> > > >
> > > > It needs to be visible to multiple libraries: ethdev, meter, sched, as
> > > > well as drivers. We'd like to avoid adding more complexity to
> > dependencies
> > > between libraries.
> > > >
> > > > It is very generic. EAL common/include is currently the place to put
> > > > generic data structures, functions, algs, etc that are widely used by DPDK
> > > libraries. Lots of similar examples are easy to find in this folder.
> > >
> > > I don't think it is *that* generic to be in EAL.
> > > Yes it is used by few libs, ethdev and by softnic PMD,
> > > but it doesn't look as core dpdk thing to me.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Where else would you put it?
> > >
> > > If it defines format of rte_mbuf fileds, then probably new .h inside
> > librte_mbuf is
> > > a good place.
> > > Other alternatives would be rte_ethdev or rte_net.
> > 
> > After going through the lib/Makefile dependencies, I see we can have
> > rte_color.h in eal or mbuf library only.
> > Cannot keep it inside ethdev or net libraries because these two libraries
> > already have dependency  on mbuf library, so cannot create loop
> > dependency.
> > 
> > Snippet
> > 
> > 1) DEPDIRS-librte_eal := librte_kvargs
> > 
> > 2)DEPDIRS-librte_mbuf := librte_eal librte_mempool
> > 
> > 3)DEPDIRS-librte_ethdev := librte_net librte_eal librte_mempool librte_ring
> > DEPDIRS-librte_ethdev += librte_mbuf
> > DEPDIRS-librte_ethdev += librte_kvargs
> > DEPDIRS-librte_ethdev += librte_cmdline
> > 
> > 4) DEPDIRS-librte_net := librte_mbuf librte_eal
> > 
> > 5) DEPDIRS-librte_meter := librte_eal
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Reshma
> 
> Yes, I wound not mind to put this header file in librte_net, it makes sense to me. But librte_net depends on librte_mbuf, so then librte_net is not an option.
> 
> The only two options are librte_eal and librte_mbuf. Between these two, my vote was librte_eal (as we already have plenty of similar items in librte_eal/common/include) instead of librte_mbuf, as to me the packet color is not related to how DPDK decides to pick its packet meta-data.
> 
> To me, librte_eal/common/include is still the best option, but I guess I can live with librte_mbuf in case Konstantin has a hard opinion on it.
> 
> What is your choice, Konstantin?

I replied in v3 that it should stay in rte_meter.h.
You can include rte_meter.h in ethdev.

The other option, agreed by Reshma, is to add black color ;)

Note: I did not see this discussion on v2 because the versions are
not in the same thread. Have I already asked to use --in-reply-to please?