Re: [PATCH 0/3] Defer lcore variables allocation

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

06/12/2024 12:01, Mattias Rönnblom:
> On 2024-12-05 18:57, David Marchand wrote:
> In retrospect, maybe the offset between lcore variable instances could 
> have been encoded into the handle, and thus one could use 
> different-sized offset for different variables.

Yes it would allow to allocate a minimum size,
instead of having a default which is also a maximum limit size of an object.

It is not too late to change the behavior as the API is experimental.

> > The general question on whether lcore variables in constructor should
> > be forbidden, is left to a later discussion.
> 
> That discussion could be extended to cover the question if RTE_INIT() 
> type constructors should be used at all. Intuitively, it seems better if 
> all DPDK initialization, or at least all EAL init, happens at the time 
> of rte_eal_init(), in some ordered/organized fashion.

Yes we may avoid constructors and instead have callbacks called in rte_eal_init().
In order to not break the RTE_INIT API, we could define some new macros
for registering such rte_eal_init callbacks.