[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] regexdev: add regexdev core functions

[Bruce Richardson]

On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:03:49AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 06/07/2020 08:07, Ori Kam:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
> > > 02/07/2020 09:46, Ori Kam:
> > > > --- a/meson_options.txt
> > > > +++ b/meson_options.txt
> > > > @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ option('max_lcores', type: 'integer', value: 128,
> > > >  	description: 'maximum number of cores/threads supported by EAL')
> > > >  option('max_numa_nodes', type: 'integer', value: 4,
> > > >  	description: 'maximum number of NUMA nodes supported by EAL')
> > > > +option('max_regexdev_devs', type: 'integer', value: 32,
> > > > +	description: 'maximum number of RegEx devices')
> > > 
> > > Do we really want to add such option in meson?
> > > Some other classes do not expose any option here.
> > > I tend to think it should be hidden.
> > > If the max is really varying, it should be dynamic.
> > > By the way, the maximum number of ethdev ports should be made infinite
> > > with a dynamic array.
> > > 
> > > Bruce, any opinion please?
> > > 
> > Why this is just like ethdev:
> > option('max_ethports', type: 'integer', value: 32,
> > description: 'maximum number of Ethernet devices')
> 
> Ethdev is the only class exposing such option.
> And we already have some requests to replace it with
> on-demand runtime dynamic size.
> That's why it's better not exposing such bad config.
> Anyway we are probably not going to need more than 32 regex engines
> in the near future. It gives us time to switch to a dynamic model.
>
I would tend to agree. In general I do not like adding new config options
so I'd prefer this not be exposed unless necessary. For ethdev, since it is
by far the mostly widely used, and since we know that people have some
varying port requirements, we have exposed this, while other classes have
not, indicating that it's probably not necessary for most device
categories.

/Bruce