From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF91A04A7;
	Tue,  5 May 2020 18:59:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D6E71D5BF;
	Tue,  5 May 2020 18:59:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from new4-smtp.messagingengine.com (new4-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.230]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8E291D16F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  5 May 2020 18:58:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47])
 by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1EB5801F1;
 Tue,  5 May 2020 12:58:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163])
 by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 May 2020 12:58:57 -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=fm1; bh=
 F4l9ckByvx1FJoVn1VSpNRS5tpdI2PkoLDq1Ju9JwjA=; b=n2/x7RJG78w4xMDx
 3G1RDMBkjhXmVO/u907de8RMTNSq10g2zYqjUGuTybnyzZEF3CTSzK26HyyPLXnw
 0HztbNB+KJUGwS+elDFo17rmx0S63/zFwkrOwLSZkm84JT22OqqxShAHF5vyvrv/
 lMslnP7VcAGt13hUZpX+NpfgEibfnJ+ejwljSnwgXXOVAshvnsWq/vk/FrUdukEt
 /OeKBobVPU2tSZKK69eDMm61enlcslPokBSQ2c6f31z9ULrMGNUI5VtuPPYm8CQ9
 RaChkphnzjHOAK25Cwc4lMX/2oCzVnCNP7H2etn/3Gqk3e4d4hnlpRm3rFLfUM6Z
 k5W1Hw==
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=F4l9ckByvx1FJoVn1VSpNRS5tpdI2PkoLDq1Ju9Jw
 jA=; b=vneneAU1wtuDxl4DK1wswDzRG3F+6MUSnL/IYbBQCdhH10LJtpykyUAs8
 CqYnCcrkZGU1cCiVmFnFrdW5x7xdX3J9yQh/5k12k0/zMbFqqlGI1Gk7dMptzukV
 9Pulra5MA5C4Lj0cHoa7dwKKBEj1j/g65qEigRDd8n6nwlGw76nk7vSFr5B/Vwuq
 pzzfHKqiDvLl6QhX9RYXPQlCDd5xJleDvlQFFvStjQ2GKZZ8OQg6+Ui0Nd+zJlhZ
 RXZ7TTpDxu+ToSbmCoNVi8jncONx5+DbHsBGks/GzpZv2ccy8ViNhecxAYlKzzYh
 v06DHvs1DyyLgCHXosLfRWP2ZTwmw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:UJuxXsCvSf84BqY2xksuSDvlXF0PjvioFVoPqVvJWYyhhq6Ab-MWtA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrjeeigddutdefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf
 fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen
 uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne
 cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr
 shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg
 ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu
 ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf
 hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl
 ohhnrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:UJuxXhxdxJ-CF33wnJWAtAoq4MD6uzFfYdhh9GTOthLP0ZG9RCjXSA>
 <xmx:UJuxXpBQ3Xj81V1J4LoSNqkGty_Vs5nHlrfi0zjdK9t5F8JGkdC7Lw>
 <xmx:UJuxXuYovttLcLSr1RG6C0fEmXQxC3eSl-QWow7uKhAYGym6W5Jq7A>
 <xmx:UZuxXiLGxw0Uyib9LhFtyLfS28lkgtbefgNSa17i2nOWPMkuMlkuSQ>
Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184])
 by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4C3A630660C9;
 Tue,  5 May 2020 12:58:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
 Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>, John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
 Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
 Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
 Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
 Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
 Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 18:58:53 +0200
Message-ID: <2445287.7s5MMGUR32@thomas>
In-Reply-To: <CALBAE1PJTfdHij_aNnOxiYgqVjBSgptdV2ebJJ86bu3gCsT9cQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200503203135.6493-1-david.marchand@redhat.com>
 <CAJFAV8yDoMTSR9wOv9tp3r8aDKvzKFMv1J_JV1ThU45TRaGpew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALBAE1PJTfdHij_aNnOxiYgqVjBSgptdV2ebJJ86bu3gCsT9cQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/8] trace: simplify trace point registration
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

05/05/2020 18:46, Jerin Jacob:
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 9:58 PM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 5:25 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 5:56 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 5:06 PM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 12:13 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Please share the data.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Measured time between first rte_trace_point_register and last one with
> > > > > > > a simple patch:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will try to reproduce this, once we finalize on the above synergy
> > > > > > with rte_log.
> > > > >
> > > > > I took the time to provide measure but you won't take the time to look at this.
> > > >
> > > > I will spend time on this. I would like to test with a shared library
> > > > also and more tracepoints.
> > > > I was looking for an agreement on using the constructor for rte_log as
> > > > well(Just make sure the direction is correct).
> > > >
> > > > Next steps:
> > > > - I will analyze the come back on this overhead on this thread.
> > >
> > > I have added 500 constructors for testing the overhead with the shared
> > > build and static build.
> > > My results inline with your results aka negligible overhead.
> > >
> > > David,
> > > Do you have plan for similar RTE_LOG_REGISTER as mentioned earlier?
> > > I would like to have rte_log and rte_trace semantics similar to registration.
> > > If you are not planning to submit the rte_log patch then I can send
> > > one for RC2 cleanup.
> >
> > It won't be possible for me.
> 
> I can do that if we agree on the specifics.
> 
> 
> >
> > Relying on the current rte_log_register is buggy with shared builds,
> > as drivers are calling rte_log_register, then impose a default level
> > without caring about what the user passed.
> > So if we introduce a RTE_LOG_REGISTER macro now at least this must be fixed too.
> >
> > What I wanted to do:
> > - merge rte_log_register_and_pick_level() (experimental) into
> > rte_log_register, doing this should be fine from my pov,
> > - reconsider the relevance of a fallback logtype when registration fails,
> > - shoot the default level per component thing: levels meaning is
> > fragmented across the drivers/libraries because of it, but this will
> > open a big box of stuff,
> 
> This you are referring to internal implementation improvement. Right?
> I was referring to remove the current clutter[1]
> If we stick the following as the interface. Then you can do other
> improvements when you get time
> that won't change the consumer code or interference part.
> 
> #define RTE_LOG_REGISTER(type, name, level)

This discussion is interesting but out of scope for rte_trace.
I am also interested in rte_log registration cleanup,
but I know it is too much work for the last weeks of 20.05.

As Olivier said about rte_trace,
"Since it's a new API, it makes sense to make
it as good as possible for the first version."

So please let's conclude on this rte_trace patch for 20.05-rc2,
and commit to fix rte_log registration in the first days of 20.08.