DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pci: fix missing pci bus with shared library build
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:35:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <16659921.iprpBmmhMi@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190723112922.52dcb9a9@hermes.lan>

23/07/2019 20:29, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 09:59:04 +0200
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 
> > 22/07/2019 20:34, Stephen Hemminger:
> > > On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:31:08 +0200
> > > Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > 22/07/2019 19:13, Stephen Hemminger:  
> > > > > Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:    
> > > > > > Are the constructors run on dlopen of the bus driver?    
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yes, constructors are run on dlopen.
> > > > > But application should not have to ask DPDK to dlopen the bus devices.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The core principle is that dynamic build of DPDK should act the same as old
> > > > > statically linked DPDK. Otherwise, the user experience is even worse, and all
> > > > > the example documentation is wrong.    
> > > > 
> > > > OK, this is where I wanted to bring the discussion.
> > > > You are arguing against a design which is in DPDK from some early days.
> > > > So this is an interesting discussion to have.
> > > > Do we want to change the "plugin model" we have?
> > > > Or do we want to simply drop this model (dlopen calls)
> > > > and replace it with strong dynamic linking?  
> > > 
> > > I argue that examples should work the same with dynamic linking.
> > > This used to work before the break out of the bus model, so it is a bug.  
> > 
> > The PCI support was part of EAL, yes, but the device drivers
> > were plugins and already required the -d option.
> > 
> > > For distributions, this also matters. Linking with -ldpdk which is a linker
> > > script should work.  
> > 
> > There is no longer this linker script with meson.
> 
> Ok, for usability that is a problem.
> Requiring user to figure out which DPDK libraries to link with is a serious
> waste of time. It should be possible to just link with -ldpdk and
> distribution packages and just get the necessary libraries for the application
> (no extra rte_foo_bar .so loaded at run time), and the application should
> just work.
> 
> The idea that the user should link with 20 shared libraries, in the right
> order and pass -d flags to eal_init to load the right PMD is user hostile.
> It only makes sense if you want to invent yet another layer to manage the
> ugly stuff hidden underneath. Think virt-manager versus raw KVM/QEMU.
> 
> I know it is hard, and I know not all this will make it into 19.08
> but let's try and do better. The DPDK already has a reputation as being
> like a super car, (ie unreliable and hard to drive). It doesn't have to be that way.

About the build-time link, it is already improved thanks
to the pkgconfig file generated by meson.
The only issue I understand is the runtime need for -d,
which is a feature, and could be removed.



  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-23 18:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-15 23:41 Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-16  0:16 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-16  0:19 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-16  8:46   ` Bruce Richardson
2019-07-16 14:46     ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-19 18:11     ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-19 20:39     ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-19 20:55     ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-22  7:38       ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-22  9:06         ` Bruce Richardson
2019-07-22 16:43           ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-22 17:04             ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-22 17:13               ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-22 17:31                 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-22 18:34                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-23  7:59                     ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-07-23 18:29                       ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-23 18:35                         ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2019-07-22 18:53                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-23 12:30                     ` Bruce Richardson
2019-07-23 18:11                       ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-07-24  8:56                         ` Bruce Richardson
2019-07-23 18:47                       ` Stephen Hemminger

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=16659921.iprpBmmhMi@xps \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.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).