Regards, Keith
On 6/3/16, 11:04 AM, "dev on behalf of Wiles, Keith" <dev-bounces at dpdk.org on behalf of keith.wiles at intel.com> wrote: >Sorry, I deleted all of the text as it was getting a bit long. > >Here are my thoughts as of now, which is a combination of many suggestions I >read from everyone?s emails. I hope this is not too hard to understand. > >- Break out the current command line options out of the DPDK common code and >move into a new lib. > - At this point I was thinking of keeping the rte_eal_init(args, argv) API > and just have it pass the args/argv to the new lib to create the data storage. > - Maybe move the rte_eal_init() API to the new lib or keep it in the > common eal code. Do not want to go hog wild. > - The rte_eal_init(args, argv) would then call to the new API > rte_eal_initialize(void), which in turn queries the data storage. (still > thinking here) > - The example apps args needs to be passed to the examples as is for now, > then we can convert them one at a time if needed. > >- I would like to keep the storage of the data separate from the file parser >as they can use the ?set? routines to build the data storage up. > - Keeping them split allows for new parsers to be created, while keeping the > data storage from changing. >- The rte_cfg code could be modified to use the new configuration if someone >wants to take on that task ? > >- Next is the data storage and how we can access the data in a clean simple >way. >- I want to have some simple level of hierarchy in the data. > - Having a string containing at least two levels ?primary:secondary?. > - Primary string is something like ?EAL? or ?Pktgen? or ?testpmd? to > divide the data storage into logical major groups. > - The primary allows us to have groups and then we can have common > secondary strings in different groups if needed. > - Secondary string can be whatever the developer of that group would like > e.g. simple ?EAL:foobar?, two levels ?testpmd:foo.bar? > > - The secondary string is treated as a single string if it has a hierarchy > or not, but referencing a single value in the data storage. > - Key value pairs (KVP) or a hashmap data store. > - The key here is the whole string ?EAL:foobar? not just ?foobar? > secondary string. > - If we want to have the two split I am ok with that as well > meaning the API would be: > rte_map_get(mapObj, ?EAL?, ?foo.bar?); > rte_map_set(mapObj, ?EAL?, ?foo.bar?, value); > - Have the primary as a different section in the data store, would > allow for dumping that section maybe easier, not sure. > - I am leaning toward A single string, but let me know your thoughts. > - Not going to try splitting up the string or parse it as it is up to the > developer to make it unique in the data store. >- Use a code design to make the strings simple to use without having typos be >a problem. > - Not sure what the design is yet, but I do not want to have to concat two > string or split strings in the code. > >This is as far as I have gotten and got tired of typing ? > >I hope this will satisfy most everyone?s needs for now. > > >Regards, >Keith > > > >
