DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mohammed Hawari <mohammed@hawari.fr>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] build: allow disabling libs
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 14:54:21 +0200
Message-ID: <33FE1BDE-C31E-4879-836B-DA22C850B829@hawari.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200918114329.GA1589@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

Hello Bruce,

Thanks for the quick response, see inline

Best regards,

Mohammed

> On 18 Sep 2020, at 13:43, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 10:49:23AM +0200, Mohammed Hawari wrote:
>> Similarly to the disable_drivers option, the disable_libs option is
>> introduced. This allows to selectively disable the build of elements
>> in libs to speed-up the build process.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Hawari <mohammed@hawari.fr>
>> ---
> 
> While I don't particularly like allowing libs to be enabled and disabled
> since it complicates the build, I can see why it's necessary. This is an
> area that does need some discussion, as I believe others have some opinions
> in this area too.
> 
> However, for now, some additional thoughts, both on this patch and in
> general:
> 
> 1. I see you included disabling apps if their required libs are not
>   available. What about the drivers though?
To my understanding, in the current code, the drivers/meson.build file already
does that check with:

foreach d:deps
                if not is_variable('shared_rte_' + d)
                    build = false

> 2. A bigger issue is whether this is really what we want to do, guarantee a
>   passing build even if vast chunks of DPDK are actually enabled? I'd tend
>   towards "no" in this case, and I'd rather see disabling of libs more
>   constrained.
> 3. To this end, I think I'd rather see us maintain a set of libs which are
>   allowed to be disabled, and prevent the rest from being so. For example,
>   it makes no sense in DPDK to disable the EAL or mempool libs, since nothing
>   will build, while the bitrate_stats or latency_stats libs could likely
>   be disabled with little or no impact.
I tend to agree with that more structured approach, but I am going to wait until
we get some more thoughts from the community before starting that work.

> Therefore, I think a better implementation is to start as in this patch
> with a new config parameter to disable libs, but as part of that patch add
> in an internal list of the libs which are allowed to be disabled (initially
> empty). Telling the build system to disable a lib not on that list should
> raise a configuration time error. As for how a lib gets on the list - that
> should be done once the build has been tested with that lib disabled, i.e.
> once testpmd and other apps have got #defines in the code for stripping out
> the disabled blocks, and any drivers which depend on the lib have proper
> checks and warnings in place about it being disabled (or also #defines in
> the code if that can be done).
> 
> The other advantage of maintaining such a list is that it then becomes
> somewhat feasible to test these build settings, in that (maybe once per
> release), iterate through the list of disable-able libs and test that the
> build passed with each one disabled individually. [I think for this purpose
> we can ignore interactions of having two disabled simultaneously, in order
> to have something testable]
> 
> What do others in the community think?
> 
> Regards,
> /Bruce


  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-18 12:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-18  8:49 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/1] " Mohammed Hawari
2020-09-18  8:49 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] " Mohammed Hawari
2020-09-18 11:43   ` Bruce Richardson
2020-09-18 12:54     ` Mohammed Hawari [this message]
2020-09-18 13:57       ` 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=33FE1BDE-C31E-4879-836B-DA22C850B829@hawari.fr \
    --to=mohammed@hawari.fr \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git