[dpdk-dev] usages issue with external mempool

Thomas Monjalon thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com
Wed Jul 27 12:00:34 CEST 2016


2016-07-27 15:21, Jerin Jacob:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:11:13AM +0000, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> > This is not a user friendly approach to ask for changing 1 API to 6 new APIs. Or, am I missing something?
> 
> I agree, To me, this is very bad. I have raised this concern earlier
> also
> 
> Since applications like OVS goes through "rte_mempool_create" for
> even packet buffer pool creation. IMO it make senses to extend
> "rte_mempool_create" to take one more argument to provide external pool
> handler name(NULL for default). I don't see any valid technical reason
> to treat external pool handler based mempool creation API different
> from default handler.
> 
> Oliver, David
> 
> Thoughts ?
> 
> If we agree on this then may be I can send the API deprecation notices for
> rte_mempool_create for v16.11

It would have been a lot better to send a patch during the 16.07 cycle
to avoid breaking again the API.
I'm afraid it will even be too late for the deprecation notice.



More information about the dev mailing list