From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 483485689 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B48EB21FB5; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=M1C11nHPKt/zsApiCYKVnhhZxruggcnUCYZBonmqlYU=; b=fBS/lSDEZgUL OxcW7VTWQlyII/5kaeXrRArNFjoijh83P9qYbH3ForlKyH60SEx3HMMiiynMsO3Y 4xEUayIcyIjmilx6781KHiGlKMglNdQddkZ3c9Qwrc5D90y7z+rC67p2Mn7NHmMD 5T7fhYZrsxskhwD9EU9UIsw7Ldz3FDQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=M1C11nHPKt/zsApiCYKVnhhZxruggcnUCYZBonmql YU=; b=YOBmQulK+4dZ6RcSGH55FwL/+cdaSjqm3azOPEGbfEsPcboSasXGfXpRZ JStWx2LUC625CC8u4wkEA+IhLjAlx4CnRb0/jpdr6nchoGE1gdykb5FCcSnE4IiO G9UTttz66f3TPh87HxEFd4Yjc6SOqQDWIGYhO+7l8S021E4W79YOVx1Z4+aHu2gx 20udN/i8/Jj6T5tWAt+Nb0RKeVa/cNDhYlbqdzWpqY7R6oUh4tKzymQjd9NvXnoK FZ/lJ0uVJ6V70peDSO4sfoTM6N0yQtu9WJG+33i08hP2nkeYfbCgY60s3Cj3CLxf y1iOrtr10IJmDeAbJgyLwUp0saGew== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrvdejgdduvddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 06334E4115; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" , "yskoh@mellanox.com" , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:16 +0200 Message-ID: <1966190.OdWs8lNuHB@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190406142737.20091-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <3120421.JkTWNKALu9@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/4] meson: add infra to support machine specific flags 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 17:44:20 -0000 14/04/2019 16:40, Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula: > Hi Thomas, > > There is no guarantee of primary part number (machine names) uniqueness between implementors. I think we don't speak the same language :) By machine name, I mean what we set in RTE_MACHINE, like octeontx2. > If we limit lookups to only machine names through primary part number we would have a lot of repetitive defines. > Also, moving the arrays into the python script is not feasible as meson needs to reparse the standard out from the python script I will probably need to write a PoC. > Currently, config is split into three parts : > 1. Implementor specific defines. > 2. Micro-arch specific compiler flags. > 3. Micro-arch specific defines. This is currently unreadable in my opinion. > I think from a configurability point of view the above three are really important for fine grained control. I agree fine grain is required. > Thoughts? > > Regards, > Pavan. > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Thomas Monjalon > >Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2019 2:13 AM > >To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > >Cc: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula ; > >dev@dpdk.org; jerinjacobk@gmail.com; yskoh@mellanox.com; > >bruce.richardson@intel.com > >Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/4] meson: add infra to support machine > >specific flags > > > >13/04/2019 08:24, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran: > >> > I was not confortable with this patch without being able to say why. > >> > Yesterday I spent more time to understand and see what may be improved. > >> > I agree it is late, so it won't block this patch for 19.05. > >> > Do you agree this file can be improved? > >> > >> Moving to the all to static config file is an option but we lose the > >> flexibility of runtime detecting the options and few of them are > >> probing at runtime based on gcc versions and mcpu combination etc. > > > >I think there is a misunderstanding. > >I'm suggesting to symplify arrays by indexing only by machine name. > >It should not change the behaviour. > > > >> I am not expert in meson area and not sure meson/python has better > >> data strcture for this other than list/array combo. If Bruce has any > >> feedback on this, then we will try to prototype it. > >> > >> > Please would you like to look at reworking during next cycle? > >> > Thanks > > > > > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD66AA00E6 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046CE568A; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 483485689 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B48EB21FB5; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:19 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=M1C11nHPKt/zsApiCYKVnhhZxruggcnUCYZBonmqlYU=; b=fBS/lSDEZgUL OxcW7VTWQlyII/5kaeXrRArNFjoijh83P9qYbH3ForlKyH60SEx3HMMiiynMsO3Y 4xEUayIcyIjmilx6781KHiGlKMglNdQddkZ3c9Qwrc5D90y7z+rC67p2Mn7NHmMD 5T7fhYZrsxskhwD9EU9UIsw7Ldz3FDQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=M1C11nHPKt/zsApiCYKVnhhZxruggcnUCYZBonmql YU=; b=YOBmQulK+4dZ6RcSGH55FwL/+cdaSjqm3azOPEGbfEsPcboSasXGfXpRZ JStWx2LUC625CC8u4wkEA+IhLjAlx4CnRb0/jpdr6nchoGE1gdykb5FCcSnE4IiO G9UTttz66f3TPh87HxEFd4Yjc6SOqQDWIGYhO+7l8S021E4W79YOVx1Z4+aHu2gx 20udN/i8/Jj6T5tWAt+Nb0RKeVa/cNDhYlbqdzWpqY7R6oUh4tKzymQjd9NvXnoK FZ/lJ0uVJ6V70peDSO4sfoTM6N0yQtu9WJG+33i08hP2nkeYfbCgY60s3Cj3CLxf y1iOrtr10IJmDeAbJgyLwUp0saGew== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrvdejgdduvddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 06334E4115; Sun, 14 Apr 2019 13:44:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" , "yskoh@mellanox.com" , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2019 19:44:16 +0200 Message-ID: <1966190.OdWs8lNuHB@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190406142737.20091-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <3120421.JkTWNKALu9@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/4] meson: add infra to support machine specific flags 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" Message-ID: <20190414174416.NhyZFgCfXaDetPw3ImEgYY6OPUAQgd6ZgHNkD0L2cck@z> 14/04/2019 16:40, Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula: > Hi Thomas, > > There is no guarantee of primary part number (machine names) uniqueness between implementors. I think we don't speak the same language :) By machine name, I mean what we set in RTE_MACHINE, like octeontx2. > If we limit lookups to only machine names through primary part number we would have a lot of repetitive defines. > Also, moving the arrays into the python script is not feasible as meson needs to reparse the standard out from the python script I will probably need to write a PoC. > Currently, config is split into three parts : > 1. Implementor specific defines. > 2. Micro-arch specific compiler flags. > 3. Micro-arch specific defines. This is currently unreadable in my opinion. > I think from a configurability point of view the above three are really important for fine grained control. I agree fine grain is required. > Thoughts? > > Regards, > Pavan. > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Thomas Monjalon > >Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2019 2:13 AM > >To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > >Cc: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula ; > >dev@dpdk.org; jerinjacobk@gmail.com; yskoh@mellanox.com; > >bruce.richardson@intel.com > >Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/4] meson: add infra to support machine > >specific flags > > > >13/04/2019 08:24, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran: > >> > I was not confortable with this patch without being able to say why. > >> > Yesterday I spent more time to understand and see what may be improved. > >> > I agree it is late, so it won't block this patch for 19.05. > >> > Do you agree this file can be improved? > >> > >> Moving to the all to static config file is an option but we lose the > >> flexibility of runtime detecting the options and few of them are > >> probing at runtime based on gcc versions and mcpu combination etc. > > > >I think there is a misunderstanding. > >I'm suggesting to symplify arrays by indexing only by machine name. > >It should not change the behaviour. > > > >> I am not expert in meson area and not sure meson/python has better > >> data strcture for this other than list/array combo. If Bruce has any > >> feedback on this, then we will try to prototype it. > >> > >> > Please would you like to look at reworking during next cycle? > >> > Thanks > > > > > >