On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 05:45:20PM +0200, Marc Sune wrote: > > > On 07/05/15 17:35, Bruce Richardson wrote: > >The "lib" directory is getting very crowded, with both general libs and > >poll mode drivers in it. This patch set proposes to move the PMDs out of the > >lib folder and to put them in a separate "pmds" folder. This should help > >with code browse-ability as the number of libs, and pmds increases. > > > >Comments or objections? > > > >Bruce Richardson (2): > > pmds: Use relative rather than absolute paths > > pmds: move pmds from lib to separate pmd dir > > > > create mode 100644 pmds/librte_pmd_xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c > > create mode 100644 pmds/librte_pmd_xenvirt/rte_xen_lib.c > > create mode 100644 pmds/librte_pmd_xenvirt/rte_xen_lib.h > > create mode 100644 pmds/librte_pmd_xenvirt/virtio_logs.h > > create mode 100644 pmds/librte_pmd_xenvirt/virtqueue.h > > > > But at the end they are also libraries. What about something like: > > * libs/core <= fundamental libraries (eal, mbuf rings...) > * libs/pmds <= all pmds > > And other feature-group oriented, higher level lib, directories (not sure > right now how to better classify them right now): > * libs/processing <= packet processing > * libs/utils > ... > Yes, they are all just libs, so we could make "pmds" be a sub-dir of the lib folder. I prefer the shorter path myself, but if others want a multi-level hierarchy it's no big deal.
For the other libs, I'm not sure we need to split them up, and I also think that trying to divide them into categories - and what those categories should be could - cause endless discussion. However, maybe I'm overly pessimistic... :-) /Bruce