[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] config: add default linux configuration

Thomas Monjalon thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com
Fri Feb 12 18:13:49 CET 2016


2016-02-12 16:59, Ferruh Yigit:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 04:04:07PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2016-02-12 14:31, Panu Matilainen:
> > > On 01/28/2016 04:31 PM, Bernard Iremonger wrote:
> > > > add config/defconfig_x86_64-default-linuxapp-gcc file.
> > > 
> > > There was a related discussion back in March, see
> > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-March/014626.html
> > > 
> > > I intended to go with that and submit patch(es) but the amount of 
> > > duplication and new files gets mind-numbing when you make them for all 
> > > existing targets. In other words, this approach doesn't scale.
> > > 
> > > Thomas, I remember seeing a plan to include a configure script in DPDK 
> > > many times in past months. Do you have something specific in mind, ie 
> > > actually use autoconf or just a custom hand-written script named 
> > > "configure" that roughly resembles autoconf configure or...?
> > 
> > A script named "configure" looks fine.
> > Bruce introduced the idea of calling "make config" in the script:
> > 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026256.html
> > Maybe it is a good start to move forward.
> > I think we have to choose between a script and a kconfig approach giving
> > the menus GUIs as bonus.
> > 
> Another thing kconfig can help is to resolve dependencies, harder to make this with a
> script. Currently we already have dependencies, although not complex, and resolved
> within makefile.

Dependencies are not so well resolved currently.
We have internal and external dependencies.
The internal ones would be better resolved with kconfig or a script.
The external dependencies are often managed by autotools but I'm sure
we prefer have a clean script instead of this beast ;)

> I believe correct place to solve them is a configuration tool so that makefiles or
> source files can be clean.

I think a configuration tool/script must help to make a working config.
But do you really think we should remove the gatekeepers in Makefiles?



More information about the dev mailing list