[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] mbuf: add user command line config mempools ops API

[Hemant Agrawal]

On 1/15/2018 5:59 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
>> Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:41:14 +0530
>> From: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>

>> This patch add the user command line configured mempool ops name
>> API to librte_mbuf and sends a deprecation notice to remove the
>> similar API from eal.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>
>> ---
>>  doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst |  7 +++++++
>>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c           |  8 +++++++-
>>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h           | 10 ++++++++++
>>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_version.map |  1 +
>>  4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> index 13e8543..ec8018f 100644
>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> @@ -8,6 +8,13 @@ API and ABI deprecation notices are to be posted here.
>>  Deprecation Notices
>>  -------------------
>>
>> +* eal: a mbuf specific API was part of eal APIs. This is now being
>> +  moved to librte_mbuf to be with other similar APIs.
>> +  The following API is target to be deprecated on 18.05.
>> +
>> +  - ``rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops`` replaced by
>> +	``rte_mbuf_user_mempool_ops''
>> +
>
> I think, deprecation notice need to be in a separate 'doc" patch.

Yes. you are right.

<snip>..

>> +const char *
>> +rte_mbuf_user_mempool_ops(void)
>> +{
>> +	return internal_config.user_mbuf_pool_ops_name;
>> +}
>> +
>>  /* Return mbuf pool ops name */
>>  static const char *
>>  rte_mbuf_best_mempool_ops(void)
>>  {
>>  	/* User defined mempool ops takes the priority */
>> -	const char *best_ops = rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops();
>
> I think, we may need to remove the stale rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops() once
> it is replaced.

Do you mean that till the API is not deprecated, we shall keep the usage?