From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] net/sfc: add support for driver-wide
 dynamic logging
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 17:56:14 +0300
Message-ID: <8b5e125d-b04a-b992-e99a-16412f8703d3@solarflare.com>
References: <1516899647-8541-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com>
 <1516899647-8541-3-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com>
 <51bd745e-5fdd-90fe-b8c0-32f903cecf2d@intel.com>
 <df846bf1-3edf-5754-ffa7-0f75aa5bfdb3@solarflare.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com
 [67.231.154.164]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CE564C7F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  6 Mar 2018 15:56:24 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <df846bf1-3edf-5754-ffa7-0f75aa5bfdb3@solarflare.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 03/06/2018 05:45 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 03/05/2018 05:59 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 1/25/2018 5:00 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>> From: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@solarflare.com>
>> <...>
>>
>>> @@ -2082,3 +2084,14 @@ RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PARAM_STRING(net_sfc_efx,
>>>       SFC_KVARG_STATS_UPDATE_PERIOD_MS "=<long> "
>>>       SFC_KVARG_MCDI_LOGGING "=" SFC_KVARG_VALUES_BOOL " "
>>>       SFC_KVARG_DEBUG_INIT "=" SFC_KVARG_VALUES_BOOL);
>>> +
>>> +RTE_INIT(sfc_driver_register_logtype);
>>> +static void
>>> +sfc_driver_register_logtype(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    int ret;
>>> +
>>> +    ret = rte_log_register_type_and_pick_level(SFC_LOGTYPE_PREFIX 
>>> "driver",
>>> +                           RTE_LOG_NOTICE);
>> No benefit of using rte_log_register_type_and_pick_level() here, in 
>> this stage
>> "opt_loglevel_list" will be empty and this will be same as 
>> rte_log_register()
>
> That's true except "uniform approach is good". I.e. simply use
> rte_log_register_type_and_pick_level() everywhere to make it safe against
> code movements.
> In fact it was raised during internal review and we kept as you can 
> see it.
>
> Other option is to avoid usage of constructor here at all and move it 
> to probe.
> Yes, it will be tried many times, but there is no harm if it is 
> already registered.

In fact it could be really required if dynamic library is used and it is
pulled later using dlopen() - don't know if there are any restrictions in
DPDK which prevent it.