[dpdk-dev] [PATCHv7 03/47] common/dpaa2: adding qbman driver

Ferruh Yigit ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Mon Feb 27 16:35:41 CET 2017


On 2/27/2017 10:01 AM, Shreyansh Jain wrote:
> Hello Ferruh,
> 
> On Friday 24 February 2017 03:28 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
>>>
>>> Now, we have these possibility:
>>> 1. Have a shared library with non rte_* symbols
>>> 2. We have shared library with rte_* symbols
>>> 3. We have non-net devices (crypto, eventdev, ..) depend on net for
>>> these hardware interfaces
>>>
>>> (2) is hitting performance significantly.
>>> (3) it not a clean solution, having driver/crypto depend on driver/net.
>>> When new devices are there, more dependencies will occur.
>>>
>>> In crux, probably we need to have a discussion on (1) and how strongly
>>> we feel about that (specially in context of drivers).
>>
>> Insight of above information, I would be OK with (1).
> 
> Great. Thank you for understanding.
> 
>>
>> We can go with option (1) now, since these are not real APIs to user
>> application, it can be possible to change them if better solution found.
>>
>> Do you think is it good idea to have different naming syntax for those
>> libraries to clarify they are for PMD internal usage?
>>
> 
> Indeed. Current name is librte_common_dpaa2_*.
> Do you think librte_drvlib_dpaa2 or librte_drvlib_dpaa2_pmd is better?

common vs drvlib may not be different for who don't know about these
libraries, what about using "internal" or "private" kind of keyword?



More information about the dev mailing list