From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Hunt, David" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/9] lib/librte_power: add extra msg type for policies Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:51:27 +0100 Message-ID: <03bd16af-613c-3eea-a5f9-d5a3e959533f@intel.com> References: <1506342429-199695-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1507108515-186477-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1507108515-186477-3-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <97a6d374-87b5-484e-bd34-7060e5276ae1@caviumnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, jingjing.wu@intel.com, Nemanja Marjanovic , Rory Sexton To: santosh , dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5748B2B9E for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 11:51:30 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <97a6d374-87b5-484e-bd34-7060e5276ae1@caviumnetworks.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 5/10/2017 10:21 AM, santosh wrote: > Hi David, > > > On Thursday 05 October 2017 02:08 PM, Hunt, David wrote: >> Hi Santosh, >> >> On 4/10/2017 4:36 PM, santosh wrote: >>> Hi David, >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday 04 October 2017 02:45 PM, David Hunt wrote: >>>> Signed-off-by: Nemanja Marjanovic >>>> Signed-off-by: Rory Sexton >>>> Signed-off-by: David Hunt >>>> --- >>> my 2cent: >>> General comment on implementation approach: >>> IMO, we should avoid PMD details in common lib area. >>> example: file channel_commons.h has ifdef clutter referencing >>> i40e pmds all over. >>> >>> Perhaps we should introduce opaque handle example void * or introduce pmd >>> specific callback/handle which points to PMD specific metadata in power library. >>> >>> Example: >>> struct channel_packet { >>> void *pmd_specific_metadata; >>> } >>> >>> Or someway via callback (I'm not sure at the moment) >>> so that we could hide PMD details in common area. >>> >>> Thanks. >> I would agree that PMD specific details are good left to the PMDs, however I think that the initial >> example should be OK as is, and as new PMDs are added, we can find commonality between them >> which stays in the example, and any really specific stuff can be pushed back behind an opaque. >> >> What about the v5 I submitted (without the #ifdef's)? Are you OK with that for this release, and we can >> fine tune as other PMDS are added in future releases? >> > Yes. But in future releases, we should do more code clean up in power lib and example area.. > meaning; current example implementation uses names like _vsi.. specific to intel NICs, > we should remove such naming and their dependency code from example area. > > Thanks. I agree. I plan to clean up the API in the next release of DPDK. For exmaple, there are private header files that are called rte_*.h that expose private functions to the documentation. These need to be renamed, as well as moving some structures around. I can also look at re-naming some of the vsi vars to something more generic. Thanks, Dave.