Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/3] EAL change for using a config file for DPDK

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

24/01/2019 17:18, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 1/24/2019 4:06 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 24/01/2019 15:46, Ferruh Yigit:
> >> On 1/24/2019 2:32 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> 24/01/2019 14:54, Ferruh Yigit:
> >>>> On 1/23/2019 8:26 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>>>> 23/01/2019 20:31, Ferruh Yigit:
> >>>>>> On 7/13/2017 11:07 AM, kubax.kozak at intel.com (Kuba Kozak) wrote:
> >>>>>>> This patchset introduce a mechanism for running dpdk application with 
> >>>>>>> parameters provided by configuration file.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A new API for EAL takes a config file data type - either loaded from
> >>>>>>> file, or built up programmatically in the application - and extracts
> >>>>>>> DPDK parameters from it to be used when eal init is called. 
> >>>>>>> This allows apps to have an alternative method to configure EAL,
> >>>>>>> other than via command-line parameters.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Reworked applications are used to demonstrate the new eal API.
> >>>>>>> If a --cfgfile-path <path> option is passed into command line non
> >>>>>>> EAL section, then the file is loaded and used by app. If a file
> >>>>>>> called config.ini is present in current working directory, and
> >>>>>>> no --cfgfile-path option is passed in, config.ini file will be
> >>>>>>> loaded and used by app.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Patch "app/testpmd: add parse options from JSON cfg file" 
> >>>>>>> demonstrates the usage of JSON instead of INI file format. 
> >>>>>>> JSON file can be called the same way as above, 
> >>>>>>> through --cfgfile-path <path> argument.
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>> this patch depends on:
> >>>>>>> "Rework cfgfile API to enable apps config file support"
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> v5:
> >>>>>>>   changed define "RTE_DEVTYPE_VIRTUAL" to "RTE_DEVTYPE_UNDEFINED"
> >>>>>>>   due to compilation errors (changes on current master).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> v4:
> >>>>>>>  Code optimalisation in parse_vdev_devices() function.
> >>>>>>>  Moved some functions from librte_eal/bsdapp and librte_eal/linuxapp
> >>>>>>>  to the librte_eal/common.
> >>>>>>>  Bug fixes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> v3: 
> >>>>>>>  split one patchset into two distinct patchsets:
> >>>>>>>  1. cfgfile library and TEST app changes
> >>>>>>>  2. EAL changes and examples (this patchset depends on cfgfile)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> v2:
> >>>>>>>   lib eal:
> >>>>>>> 	Rework of rte_eal_configure(struct rte_cfgfile *cfg, char *prgname).
> >>>>>>> 	Now this function load data from cfg structure and did initial
> >>>>>>> 	initialization of EAL arguments. Vdev argument are stored in different
> >>>>>>> 	subsections eg. DPDK.vdev0, DPDK.vdev1 etc. After execution of this
> >>>>>>> 	function it is necessary to call rte_eal_init to complete EAL
> >>>>>>> 	initialization. There is no more merging arguments from different
> >>>>>>> 	sources (cfg file and command line).
> >>>>>>>   	Added non_eal_configure to testpmd application.
> >>>>>>> 	Function maintain the same functionality as rte_eal_configure but
> >>>>>>> 	for non-eal arguments. 
> >>>>>>>   	Added config JSON feature to testpmd last patch from patchset contain
> >>>>>>> 	example showing use of .json configuration files.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   lib cfgfile:
> >>>>>>>   	Rework of add_section(), add_entry() new implementation
> >>>>>>>   	New members allocated_entries/sections, free_entries/sections
> >>>>>>> 	in rte_cfgfile structure, change in array of pointers
> >>>>>>> 	**sections, **entries instead of *sections[], *entries[]
> >>>>>>>   	Add  set_entry() to update/overwrite already existing entry in cfgfile
> >>>>>>> 	struct
> >>>>>>>   	Add save() function to save on disc cfgfile structure in INI format
> >>>>>>>   	Rework of existing load() function  simplifying the code
> >>>>>>>   	Add unit test realloc_sections() in TEST app for testing realloc/malloc
> >>>>>>> 	of new API functions, add test for save() function
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Kuba Kozak (3):
> >>>>>>>   eal: add functions parsing EAL arguments
> >>>>>>>   app/testpmd: add parse options from cfg file
> >>>>>>>   app/testpmd: add parse options from JSON cfg file
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This patchset is idle more than a year now.
> >>>>>> It solves problem of eal parameters, it doesn't remove them but at least moves
> >>>>>> from command line to config file.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The patch seems mostly done, but what is the status of it, do we want to
> >>>>>> continue it?
> >>>>>> And if we want to continue it can this be a good candidate for GCOS?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think we must focus on reorganization of EAL first.
> >>>>> When the options parsing will be better isolated,
> >>>>> and accessible from API independant of rte_eal_init,
> >>>>> then we could provide some helpers to use those APIs
> >>>>> for a config file, a custom command line or anything else.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is there any actions do we need to take when patches are rejected?
> >>>
> >>> Not sure I understand your question.
> >>> Any opinion about such plan?
> >>
> >> When patch status updated, they will disappear from our radar, should we do
> >> something to remind us this kind of work needs to be done and already some
> >> patches are available to benefit.
> >>
> >> Keeping them in the patchwork is one option, but it is getting hard to manage as
> >> the list grows there, and not all work stays relevant/active in the backlog.
> >> Also their status is not clear in the patchwork backlog.
> > 
> > I think we should add an item in the roadmap with a link to this patch.
> 
> OK. Do you want me do it?

Yes please expose your view in a roadmap patch.
If needed, we can discuss the plan in techboard meeting.