Re: [dpdk-dev] config files maintenance

["Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 8:08 AM
> To: Zhang, Helin; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: config files maintenance
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Currently most of the build options are duplicated in 2 config files.
> They should be merged in a common file to avoid this kind of differences:
> 
> --- config/common_bsdapp
> +++ config/common_linuxapp
> -CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR=y
> -CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_DISABLE=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y
> -CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_I40E_RX_ALLOW_BULK_ALLOC=n
> +CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_I40E_RX_ALLOW_BULK_ALLOC=y
> 
> Can we enable ixgbe SSE on BSD?
> CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_DISABLE must be renamed to
> CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE, or can we remove this option?
> Can we remove i40e bulk alloc option?
As the receiving functions are different for bulk_alloc or not, we need this flag.

> Why IEEE1588 is disabled? Can we remove this option?
I think the reason was it wanted to show the best performance by default,
as more processing are needed for ieee1588 in fast path.
I agree with you that we may need to re-think it.

Thanks,
Helin

> 
> Please help to fix it for the release 2.1.
> 
> After fixing the config, we have to think about simplifying it in 2.2.
> It would be easier to have some kind of config overlays:
> 	config_base
> 	config_bsd
> 	config_linux
> 	config_osv
> 	config_gcc
> 	config_icc
> 	config_clang
> 	config_i686
> 	config_x86_64
> 	config_x86_x32
> 	config_ppc_64
> 	config_tile-tilegx
> Then the defconfig files would include the above files.
> Or better, we could allow some paramaters to make config:
> 	make config ARCH= OS= CC=
> 
> Thoughts?