From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Stephen Hurd <stephen.hurd@broadcom.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] New driver (large patch) question.
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 23:15:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3156888.xIWalfADA6@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ9nmBbvmmO_ajjqCSjGnRMGVd_GDB_MGwUcSKeRYsgg7cheng@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-02 14:06, Stephen Hurd:
> The issue is that the big header in question is the whole hardware/firmware
> interface definition. The comments in it are the only publicly available
> documentation on the hardware I'm aware of.
So you must keep the comments.
> The driver itself doesn't have a lot of optional features in it, it's the
> header file that's too big.
It is big because there are many different things.
You can split the file in different patches.
Examples:
- a patch for RSS will bring the hardware structures for RSS
- a patch for the stats will bring the hardware stats structures
etc
PS: please answer inline
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 2016-03-02 13:30, Stephen Hurd:
> > > The bulk of the patch is the hardware interface header file. With all
> > the
> > > comments, it weighs in around 800k. If I strip the comments, it's around
> > > 300k. If I both strip all the comments and remove all the currently
> > unused
> > > structures, I can get the entire patch down just below 300k, but that
> > makes
> > > it much harder for someone to do further development. I'm willing to do
> > > that though if it's what's preferred.
> > >
> > > The other large file (560k) is just a bunch of extra debug output that
> > > makes it easier to debug issues. It's normally not compiled, so it
> > sounds
> > > like it's not wanted either.
> >
> > If the code is not needed, it's obviously better to not submit it :)
> >
> > > I'll submit without comments in the hardware interface file and take it
> > > from there.
> >
> > I don't think removing the comments is a good option.
> > Please try to split per-feature to make it readable.
> > You can check how fm10k was introduced as an example:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.networking.dpdk.devel/13447
> > or mlx5:
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.networking.dpdk.devel/26986
> >
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-02 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAJ9nmBaWh8WsuzQcAfrebjaFNYSGsGxEd5Y5DQfWTPuxYY8XWQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-02 10:21 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-02 16:24 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-03-02 21:30 ` Stephen Hurd
2016-03-02 21:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-02 22:06 ` Stephen Hurd
2016-03-02 22:12 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-03-02 22:15 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-03-02 23:10 ` Stephen Hurd
2016-03-03 0:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-03-03 1:04 ` Stephen Hurd
2016-03-03 5:53 ` Qiu, Michael
2016-03-03 19:40 ` Stephen Hurd
2016-03-02 23:07 ` Vincent JARDIN
2016-03-02 23:43 ` Bruce Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3156888.xIWalfADA6@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=stephen.hurd@broadcom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).