On 3/10/2021 9:53 PM, Ed Czeck wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:44 AM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
On 3/10/2021 3:02 PM, Ed Czeck wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 12:36 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
On 3/9/2021 4:08 PM, Ed Czeck wrote:
In this commit we generalize the movement of user-specified
meta data between mbufs and FPGA AXIS tuser fields using
user-defined hook functions.
- Previous use of PMD dynfields are removed
- Hook function added to ark_user_ext
- Add hook function calls in Rx and Tx paths
- Update guide with example of hook function use
- Add release notes
Signed-off-by: Ed Czeck <ed.cz...@atomicrules.com>
---
v3:
- split function rename to separate commit
v4:
- reorder patches renaming before adding
<...>
diff --git a/drivers/net/ark/version.map b/drivers/net/ark/version.map
index 954bea679..4a76d1d52 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ark/version.map
+++ b/drivers/net/ark/version.map
@@ -1,10 +1,3 @@
DPDK_21 {
local: *;
};
-
-EXPERIMENTAL {
- global:
-
- rte_pmd_ark_tx_userdata_dynfield_offset;
- rte_pmd_ark_rx_userdata_dynfield_offset;
-};
Since there is no more public APIs by driver, I think it should stop installing
the header, and remove it from 'meson.build' file, and remove the header from
API documentation, 'doc/api/doxy-api-index.md'.
I can see the header needs to be used by the extension developer, but that is
still kind of PMD, the public headers are installed for the application
developers.
Still there is a desire to install the required headers for PMD developers, as
far as I know Bruce is working on it, cc'ed. This header can be installed as
part of that effort.
Thanks,
ferruh
The function prototypes in the header are required by the extension
developer, hence
they need to be accessible in an installed file. Placing them in
rte_pmd-ark.h seems
like the existing solution. If there is a better location or solution
for publishing these
definitions, I have not found it yet. Please advise if I should change
this in some way.
I slightly remember we had same discussion before.
Installed public headers are for application usage, but for ark PMD the header
is for the PMD extension development. Currently there is no similar usage or
requirement.
The extension is part of the application as it executes in the same space and
has access to the same data as the application.
The function definitions are required as a sanity check for the
application, without
them (or with a stale version) we lose that ability. The access to
this header file
should be part of DPDK's exported interface, without it there is not a
standard include
location for this file.
I would argue the extension is part of PMD, not part of application.
Extension is loaded by driver dynamically and provides callbacks that is called
by PMD, transparent to the application.
'rte_pmd-ark.h' seems installed last release because of the public object it had
for dynamic mbuf, which should be accessed by application. Now since those
objects are gone and the content of the header is changed, it is not for
applications anymore, hence I think it shouldn't be installed.
As far as I can see the PMD extensions are very much related to the FPGA
implementation, so the header is not for everyone to use to develop new code, I
expect whoever needs the 'rte_pmd-ark.h' should have the source code already,
instead of using the header from installed system path.
The PMD extensions are the bridge between DPDK and the FPGA details; they
are not for everyone. The same argument can be made for the other 12 net drivers
which provide PMD public methods. We are attempting to have a standard way to
access these prototypes for the installed version of DPDK.
The PMD specific APIs are different, any application developer can be using
them, if the developer wants the PMD specific feature with the trade of making
their code non-portable.
The extension callbacks is needed for whoever developing bit-streams for the
FPGA. Of course the extension developer needs to include the header you are
providing, but the standard way is for the public APIs not for this case.
Do you expect anyone developing the drivers extensions without having the DPDK
source code, if not the extension developer can copy the header.
I think overall it is good to add doxygen comments and dpdk prefix to the
extension symbols, but still they shouldn't be part of the API documentation.
Please consider my arguments and offer an alternative suggestion on how we can
provide these prototypes to our users.
As mentioned before there was a request to support out of tree driver support, I
believe your use case matches more to this request, Bruce was looking to it and
that solution can be the alternative solution you are looking for.
