Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] Yet another option for DPDK options

[Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>]

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 09:52:40PM +0300, Arnon Warshavsky wrote:
> What about the data types of the values?
> I would assume that as a library it can provide the service of typed
> get/set and not leave conversion and validation to the app.
> 
> rte_map_get_int(map,section,key)
> rte_map_get_double(...)
> rte_map_get_string(...)
> rte_map_get_bytes(...,destBuff , destBuffSize) //e.g byte array of RSS key
> 
> This may also allow some basic validity of the configuration file
> 
> Another point I forgot about is default values.
> We sometimes use a notation where the app also specifies a default value in
> case the configuration did not specify it
>   rte_map_get_int(map,section,key , defaultValue )
> and specify if this was a mandatory that has no default
>   rte_map_get_int_crash_if_missing (map,section,key)

This is why I was advising to use something similar to json-c's API with some 
type specific functions to make things easier for the users, with the 
dot-terminated naming made popular by sysctl such as 
"debug.intel.ctr_KMD_CTR_RPUPEI" and so forth.

> /Arnon

Matthew