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 B815FA0096 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 22:43:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91EE91B136; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 22:42:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3E41B104 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 22:42:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637EC21EAD; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:42:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:42:54 -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=aMQ1SSNa104xj3VgWnYsBak3D0bFxNYV+GuLYw4bDb8=; b=b8q9V//vSNzW Og24dbs+X78NY59uekT5IhFBSZgZ+NXWvLiA0BVoKHSRs63MO1QQahqEEPmTju/i HKX8aKY07I3btLmreVtDh8ORdLm0spU44MKr+WhQduGq+cE6zpuI5smfxPuLnqSO 6oU6aopgxltVV/nIaLqXpA4dsD/vyy0= 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=aMQ1SSNa104xj3VgWnYsBak3D0bFxNYV+GuLYw4bD b8=; b=G0odcXBIzu5W4ha5q29sdQaTXoVVPj+PbY/mVKXPkUQooEq2PUdrF8Lq/ H4TpWgETlIKXFGRBsLy2ezikd231lT71CL80jbvwbIxRRQIMao0LW5wNJ5TJB0Ie +EF3S+cw7CZqZvZpNe0WBDrgwpT28mey3ydPjFApbYBOxw4JLwbClKDkk+pZux1r 1Z4VN1d4GUarSgPzXNHuR1uDuDpf6PwaCWCLu4BCMUfN2cghC9/expeSNgKUzlr3 VhhrGQNWRb7bEUcENOiFXMneDlrOILABoLGWF1/DanmAe95I5ek60ThDCZFPhk0C CqP6w94buo5BjCizuC7UCFzXugYpw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrvdehgdduheefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf 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 8EBD1E44B3; Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:42:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran Cc: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula , "dev@dpdk.org" , "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" , "yskoh@mellanox.com" , "bruce.richardson@intel.com" Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 22:42:50 +0200 Message-ID: <3120421.JkTWNKALu9@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190406142737.20091-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <1848175.uIgEXrQmFj@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: <20190413204250.tlCHcK1S7VFPYdQvea5ob90eTFXqj-yvWiT_RdqMzUA@z> 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