[dpdk-dev] Solarflare PMD submission question
arybchenko at solarflare.com
Fri Nov 18 17:50:29 CET 2016
On 10/28/2016 05:43 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 10/28/2016 03:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 2016-10-28 13:50, Andrew Rybchenko:
>>> The only thing which comes to my mind is to split libefx import on
>>> basis (few files per subsystem). It is artificial and added files will
>>> be abandoned
>>> until the patch which adds them into build. It could be something like:
>>> 1. External interfaces definition
>>> 2. Internal interfaces definition
>>> 3. Registers definition (hardware interface)
>>> 4. Management CPU interface definition (it is one file, but still
>>> 5. Management CPU interface implementation
>>> and so on for NIC global controls, interrupts, event queue, transmit,
>>> filtering etc.
>> Yes it is artificial.
>> The most valuable would be a transversal logical split, kind of feature
>> per feature, in order to explain how the device works.
> I'm not the main author of the libefx and personally would consider it
> very useful.
> From the other hand I understand that it is a huge amount of work to
> make it.
>> Such commit is also the opportunity to explain acronyms and so on.
> Good. We'll go this way and 'll do my best to make it useful to
> overall structure of the code and how the device works.
Now we have a split of the base driver import in big feature steps. The
base driver is split into 28 patches. Just only 1 patch exceeds 300K
boundary (which add MCDI definitions header).
Before submitting 56 patches I'd like to double-check that checkpatch.pl
errors (for example, because of assignments in the 'if' condition,
parenthesis around return value) is not a show-stopper for base driver
More information about the dev