From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0148.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.148]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528D48DB5 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 20:01:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from CY1PR0101MB0987.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.160.224.149) by CY1PR0101MB0988.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.160.224.150) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.262.15; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 18:01:09 +0000 Received: from CY1PR0101MB0987.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.160.224.149]) by CY1PR0101MB0987.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.160.224.149]) with mapi id 15.01.0262.011; Tue, 8 Sep 2015 18:01:09 +0000 From: Don Provan To: "Wiles, Keith" , Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] rte_eal_init() alternative? Thread-Index: AQHQ5YHOqiO6Uq6KRkeaJ6H5StLhwAAPJFUAAAB5coAACrsHAAABgE2AAAR5wAD//7sDgJ4pJNaQ Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 18:01:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <44e664970fef4bff942eaee5c7eaca67@bilemail1.empirix.com> <20150902120039.69e3809c@urahara> <1964148.0REVA6fuqc@xps13> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dprovan@bivio.net; x-originating-ip: [209.234.132.35] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR0101MB0988; 5:lMafKVZazBBXTlQAXGLkskKzjrP8sWyhSctqKCNvliOUtvvGqLkUD2Sd8R768xaGmNjX7A9CCwQLZjz4TAeYV7aBj91T49cp5SkWnBgFyMjH/7wlPc8ZkjIxTuyLRSnnL3m3BXtt1gFzK/nG/DQD4A==; 24:LG+uqDPTtOXgRUk8bcKjvANp0k46eVsGhmdBKDjcgxuXulicmzSgRsKh1DhzIvAHqpZogr25zV+WDTd4CXaUjjCQDkERIcwPz3v4Yp2VtOI=; 20:9BWDugSYKcn3sGz1uDdQ4Jr+5bKVDd1zoka3ZfjaLoKFPdhxMUp/oFsY/TU0jKtRGQbdfRocMTMk3xgIcmI8jA== x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR0101MB0988; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8121501046)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:CY1PR0101MB0988; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR0101MB0988; x-forefront-prvs: 069373DFB6 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(189002)(199003)(106356001)(19580395003)(19580405001)(106116001)(68736005)(5003600100002)(77096005)(10400500002)(102836002)(77156002)(62966003)(87936001)(81156007)(5004730100002)(105586002)(74316001)(5001770100001)(97736004)(4001540100001)(122556002)(64706001)(2950100001)(54356999)(40100003)(2900100001)(50986999)(5001860100001)(5001960100002)(76176999)(189998001)(33656002)(5001920100001)(101416001)(5001830100001)(86362001)(5007970100001)(93886004)(92566002)(5002640100001)(11100500001)(66066001)(46102003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR0101MB0988; H:CY1PR0101MB0987.prod.exchangelabs.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: bivio.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: bivio.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Sep 2015 18:01:08.5471 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 8731bc55-0e76-4eb7-ae4b-401e56037945 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR0101MB0988 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] rte_eal_init() alternative? X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2015 18:01:13 -0000 From: Wiles, Keith: >That stated I am not a big fan of huge structures being passed into >a init routine as that structure would need to be versioned and it will >grow/change. Plus he did not really want to deal in strings, so the >structure would be binary values and strings as required. A typical library has an init routine which establishes defaults, and then the application adjusts parameters through targeted set routines before starting to use the library operationally. In the argc/argv wrapper, the parsing code would call one of those individual routines when it parses the corresponding command line flag. The idea that there has to be one massive init routine which is passed every possible configuration parameter is more of the same monolithic thinking that DPDK needs to shake. -don provan dprovan@bivio.net