From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnon Warshavsky Subject: Re: [RFC] Yet another option for DPDK options Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 21:52:40 +0300 Message-ID: References: <20160602200837.GC12923@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20160603102943.GC16616@bricha3-MOBL3> <20160603110129.GB17812@bricha3-MOBL3> <20160603115048.GA12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <8CE01283-1E89-4302-BE7D-486975B43EF6@intel.com> <20160603174437.GC12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <62A67FEB-AE18-43B1-8D15-27F23D5C8A7D@intel.com> <20160603183819.GD12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "Wiles, Keith" , Panu Matilainen , "Richardson, Bruce" , Thomas Monjalon , Yuanhan Liu , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Tan, Jianfeng" , Stephen Hemminger , Christian Ehrhardt , Olivier Matz To: Neil Horman Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f43.google.com (mail-oi0-f43.google.com [209.85.218.43]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423575A93 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2016 20:52:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-oi0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e72so140881637oib.1 for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2016 11:52:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160603183819.GD12627@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 06:29:13PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: > > > > On 6/3/16, 12:44 PM, "Neil Horman" wrote: > > > > >On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 04:04:14PM +0000, Wiles, Keith 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=E2=80=99s 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 th= e > data storage. > > >> - Maybe move the rte_eal_init() API to the new lib or keep it i= n > 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) > > >These three items seem to be the exact opposite of my suggestion. The > point of > > >this change was to segregate the parsing of configuration away from th= e > > >initalization dpdk using that configurtion. By keeping rte_eal_init i= n > such a > > >way that the command line is directly passed into it, you've not > changed that > > >implicit binding to command line options. > > > > Neil, > > > > You maybe reading the above wrong or I wrote it wrong, which is a high > possibility. I want to move the command line parsing out of DPDK an into = a > library, but I still believe I need to provide some backward compatibilit= y > for ABI and to reduce the learning curve. The current applications can > still call the rte_eal_init(), which then calls the new lib parser for dp= dk > command line options and then calls rte_eal_initialize() or move to the n= ew > API rte_eal_initialize() preceded by a new library call to parse the old > command line args. At some point we can deprecate the rte_eal_init() if w= e > think it is reasonable. > > > > > > > >I can understand if you want to keep rte_eal_init as is for ABI > purposes, but > > >then you should create an rte_eal_init2(foo), where foo is some handle > to in > > >memory parsed configuration, so that applications can preform that > separation. > > > > I think you describe what I had planned here. The rte_eal_initialize() > routine is the new rte_eal_init2() API and the rte_eal_init() was only fo= r > backward compatibility was my thinking. I figured the argument to > rte_eal_initialize() would be something to be decided, but it will mostly > likely be some type of pointer to the storage. > > > > I hope that clears that up, but let me know. > > > yes, that clarifies your thinking, and I agree with it. Thank you! > Neil > > > ++Keith > > > > > > > >Neil > > > > > >> - 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 fil= e > parser as they can use the =E2=80=98set=E2=80=99 routines to build the da= ta 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 =E2=98=BA > > >> > > >> - 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 > =E2=80=9Cprimary:secondary=E2=80=9D. > > >> - Primary string is something like =E2=80=9CEAL=E2=80=9D or =E2= =80=9CPktgen=E2=80=9D or > =E2=80=9Ctestpmd=E2=80=9D to divide the data storage into logical major g= roups. > > >> - 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 =E2=80=9CEAL:foobar=E2=80=9D, two levels =E2=80=9C= testpmd:foo.bar=E2=80=9D > > >> > > >> - 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 =E2=80=9CEAL:foobar=E2=80= =9D not just > =E2=80=9Cfoobar=E2=80=9D 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, =E2=80=9CEAL=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cfoo= .bar=E2=80=9D); > > >> rte_map_set(mapObj, =E2=80=9CEAL=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cfoo= .bar=E2=80=9D, 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 > > >> - 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 =E2=98=BA > > >> > > >> I hope this will satisfy most everyone=E2=80=99s needs for now. > > >> > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Keith > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Keith What about the data types of the values? I would assume that as a library it can provide the service of typed get/set and not leave conversion and validation to the app. rte_map_get_int(map,section,key) rte_map_get_double(...) rte_map_get_string(...) rte_map_get_bytes(...,destBuff , destBuffSize) //e.g byte array of RSS key This may also allow some basic validity of the configuration file Another point I forgot about is default values. We sometimes use a notation where the app also specifies a default value in case the configuration did not specify it rte_map_get_int(map,section,key , defaultValue ) and specify if this was a mandatory that has no default rte_map_get_int_crash_if_missing (map,section,key) /Arnon