From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shreyansh Jain Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/mempool: add stack mempool handler as driver Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:58:52 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1490004190-16892-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <2fc176b1-a771-f4b5-a08d-1a31f46884d5@intel.com> <37546ac7-1c60-5992-5ebf-eef8e905017e@nxp.com> <70A6BC7D-3F07-4484-A8E4-ACB14522355B@intel.com> <43b90881-7fc7-8f75-f040-2ad8ea922333@nxp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Hunt, David" , Olivier MATZ , DPDK , Thomas Monjalon , "hemant.agrawal@nxp.com" To: "Wiles, Keith" Return-path: Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-co1nam03on0079.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.40.79]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F28671075 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 07:22:57 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <43b90881-7fc7-8f75-f040-2ad8ea922333@nxp.com> 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 Tuesday 21 March 2017 11:55 AM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > Hello Keith, > > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 11:32 AM, Wiles, Keith wrote: >> >>> On Mar 20, 2017, at 11:55 PM, Shreyansh Jain >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello David, >>> >>> On Monday 20 March 2017 08:20 PM, Hunt, David wrote: >>>> >>>> On 20/3/2017 10:03 AM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: >>>>> CONFIG_RTE_DRIVER_MEMPOOL_STACK option added to common_base. >>>>> Stack mempool handler moved from lib/librte_mempool into >>>>> drivers/mempool. >>>>> >>> >>> <...> >>> >>>>> -} >>>>> - >>>>> -static struct rte_mempool_ops ops_stack = { >>>>> - .name = "stack", >>>>> - .alloc = stack_alloc, >>>>> - .free = stack_free, >>>>> - .enqueue = stack_enqueue, >>>>> - .dequeue = stack_dequeue, >>>>> - .get_count = stack_get_count >>>>> -}; >>>>> - >>>>> -MEMPOOL_REGISTER_OPS(ops_stack); >>>> >>>> Shreyansh, >>>> Could I suggest you add the parameter "--find-renames" when >>>> generating the patch files, as this will reduce the size of the patches >>>> significantly, making for easier review. The patch line count in this >>>> particular case would be reduced by approx 75%. >>> >>> Thanks for suggestion. >>> Yes, I forgot to use this option while creating this patch. If there >>> are comments and v2 needs to be created, I will keep this in mind. >>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Dave. >> >> I guess I missed an email, but what is the advantage of moving the >> ring/stack files to the drivers directory as they are not drivers in >> the sense of a NIC PMD or any other driver. You can still >> enable/disable them in the config files right? >> > > Just as reference, following is where this was being discussed: > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059690.html > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059753.html > and > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/060501.html > > Also, a while back (I can't trace that mailing list exchange), it was > decided that all mempool drivers (stack, ring, others...) would be > moved to drivers/mempool. Just to add, discussion at that time was to have: drivers/bus/ drivers/mempool/ drivers/net/ There was a drivers/common as well, but somehow it didn't go down well in discussions. > > For NXP's DPAA2 PMD, we use an offloaded mempool for which there was a > patchset by Hemant [1] which adds that driver to drivers/mempool. In > the same breadth, ring and stack are also being moved to > drivers/mempool as independent drivers (non-offloaded category). > > [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/060476.html > > In my opinion, this would make the lib/* area free of handler/drivers > (almost) and it is a good change. Also, ring and stack use a > 'registration' mechanism - just like PMD and are good candidate to be > treated as 'drivers' now even though not entirely like a PMD. > > You see any downside of this? > >> Regards, >> Keith >> >> > > - > Shreyansh > >