Re: [RFC] Yet another option for DPDK options

["Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>]

Regards,
Keith



On 6/3/16, 11:04 AM, "dev on behalf of Wiles, Keith" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org on behalf of keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:

>Sorry, I deleted all of the text as it was getting a bit long.
>
>Here are my thoughts as of now, which is a combination of many suggestions I read from everyone’s emails. I hope this is not too hard to understand.
>
>- Break out the current command line options out of the DPDK common code and move into a new lib.
>  - At this point I was thinking of keeping the rte_eal_init(args, argv) API and just have it pass the args/argv to the new lib to create the data storage.
>     - Maybe move the rte_eal_init() API to the new lib or keep it in the common eal code. Do not want to go hog wild.
>  - The rte_eal_init(args, argv) would then call to the new API rte_eal_initialize(void), which in turn queries the data storage. (still thinking here)
>  - The example apps args needs to be passed to the examples as is for now, then we can convert them one at a time if needed.
>
>- I would like to keep the storage of the data separate from the file parser as they can use the ‘set’ routines to build the data storage up.
>  - Keeping them split allows for new parsers to be created, while keeping the data storage from changing.
>- The rte_cfg code could be modified to use the new configuration if someone wants to take on that task ☺
>
>- Next is the data storage and how we can access the data in a clean simple way.
>- I want to have some simple level of hierarchy in the data.
>  - Having a string containing at least two levels “primary:secondary”.
>     - Primary string is something like “EAL” or “Pktgen” or “testpmd” to divide the data storage into logical major groups.
>        - The primary allows us to have groups and then we can have common secondary strings in different groups if needed.
>     - Secondary string can be whatever the developer of that group would like e.g. simple “EAL:foobar”, two levels “testpmd:foo.bar”
>
>  - The secondary string is treated as a single string if it has a hierarchy or not, but referencing a single value in the data storage.
>     - Key value pairs (KVP) or a hashmap data store.
>        - The key here is the whole string “EAL:foobar” not just “foobar” secondary string.
>           - If we want to have the two split I am ok with that as well meaning the API would be:
>             rte_map_get(mapObj, “EAL”, “foo.bar”);
>             rte_map_set(mapObj, “EAL”, “foo.bar”, value);
>           - Have the primary as a different section in the data store, would allow for dumping that section maybe easier, not sure.
>              - I am leaning toward
A single string, but let me know your thoughts.
>     - Not going to try splitting up the string or parse it as it is up to the developer to make it unique in the data store.
>- Use a code design to make the strings simple to use without having typos be a problem.
>   - Not sure what the design is yet, but I do not want to have to concat two string or split strings in the code.
>
>This is as far as I have gotten and got tired of typing ☺
>
>I hope this will satisfy most everyone’s needs for now.
>
>
>Regards,
>Keith
>
>
>
>