Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 00/10] eal cleanup and new options

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 03:55:19PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > There are some pending patches which requires to factorize some EAL parts
> > in order to be correctly implemented.
> > This patchset do the required clean-up and rework these patches to improve
> > lcore handling:
> > 
> > Didier Pallard (2):
> >   eal: add core list input format
> >   config: support 128 cores
> > 
> > Patrick Lu (1):
> >   eal: get relative core index
> > 
> > Simon Kuenzer (1):
> >   eal: add option --master-lcore
> > 
> > Thomas Monjalon (6):
> >   eal: move internal headers in source directory
> >   eal: factorize common headers
> >   eal: fix header guards
> >   eal: factorize internal config reset
> >   eal: factorize options sanity check
> >   eal: factorize configuration adjustment
> 
> Applied with last comments integrated.
> 
> The conclusions to the vote about the -c/-l options are:
> - people don't vote (don't care or don't read)
> - a few votes give the majority to creating the -l option.
> 
> Neil, I'm really not sure what is the best solution. Maybe that applying
> this patch will make more voices raising. We'll see, all can be changed.
> 
> -- 
My additional 2c here:
While I don't see much wrong with having core lists passed using a long option,
more and more cores are being added to the latest CPUs, so it's likely that DPDK
users are going to have systems with >64 cores and will want to move from the
coremask specifier to the core list option. In that case, having it as a short
option makes a lot of sense. 

/Bruce