Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Move EAL common functions

[Ravi Kerur <rkerur@gmail.com>]

Thanks Olivier and Neil. I will make a note on this and will work on it
after initial common code movement is completed.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 5:16 AM, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
wrote:

> Hi Neil,
>
> On 12/29/2014 01:47 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 09:47:05AM +0100, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> >> Trying to factorize the common code goes in the good direction.
> >>
> >> However I'm wondering if "common" is the proper place. Initially,
> >> the common directory was for code common to linuxapp and baremetal.
> >> Now that baremetal does not exist anymore, a lot of code is common
> >> to the 2 OSes that are supported (linux and FreeBSD).
> >>
> >> What about moving this code in "common-posix" instead?
> >> It would let the door open for future ports (Windows? or any
> >> other real time OS? Or back in baremetal?).
> >>
> > Posix doesn't make sense IMO, in that a large segment of the functions
> embodied
> > in the common directory have nothing to do with posix API's, and are
> simply just
> > useful functions that have not OS specific dependency (the entire
> > eal_common_memory.c file for example, to name just one).
> >
> > If you wanted to rename the directory, I would say generic-os would be
> more
> > appropriate.
>
> That's probably right for most of the code in the patch. I just wanted
> to point out that "common" is sometimes a bit vague (common to archs,
> common to OSes, common to all).
>
> From a quick look, these 2 files could be concerned and could go to a
> common-posix directory:
> - eal.c (use fopen/ftruncate/fcntl/mmap/...)
> - eal_thread.c (use pipe/read/write)
>
> There's no urgency to do that now and maybe we should wait it's really
> needed. I was just seizing the opportunity as the code is moved.
>
> Regards,
> Olivier
>