Re: [PATCH] config: remove explicit undef of unset values

[Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:54:33AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:14:30AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > Rather than explicitly clearing any setting of undefined values in our
> > rte_config.h file, it's better to instead just add a comment that the
> > value is not set. Using a comment allows the user to set the value using
> > CFLAGS or similar mechanism without the config file clearing the value
> > again.
> > 
> > The text used "<VALUE> is not set" is modelled after the kernel approach
> > of doing the same thing.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > Although DPDK coding convention forbids use of "//" for comments, using
> > regular C comment style makes the config settings less clear, as they can
> > be confused with regular comments in the file. Using "//" makes them stand
> > out better, so I prefer it. However, if others feel strongly, they can be
> > changed to standard.
> > 
> > Note: this is a resubmission of patch [1] which was part of a rejected
> > series. However, the reasons for rejection - values in config being out
> > of sync with those used for building apps - are less relevant for
> > many, if not all, of these setting, so I believe the benefits for
> > testing outweigh the potential downsides. If any setting is likely
> > problematic, I can keep the explicit undef for that case in a new patch
> > version.
> > 
> > [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20200903144942.671870-2-bruce.richardson@intel.com/

Acked-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>