[RFC 2/5] common/mlx5: introduce tracepoints for mlx5 drivers
Thomas Monjalon
thomas at monjalon.net
Tue Jun 27 02:39:55 CEST 2023
13/06/2023 18:01, Jerin Jacob:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 9:29 PM Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo at nvidia.com> wrote:
> > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk at gmail.com>
> > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 9:20 PM Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo at nvidia.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > <..snip..>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > mlx5_os_interrupt_handler_create; # WINDOWS_NO_EXPORT
> > > > > > mlx5_os_interrupt_handler_destroy; # WINDOWS_NO_EXPORT
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_entry;
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_exit;
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_wqe;
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_wait;
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_push;
> > > > > > + __rte_pmd_mlx5_trace_tx_complete;
> > > > >
> > > > > No need to expose these symbols. It is getting removed from rest of DPDK.
> > > > > Application can do rte_trace_lookup() to get this address.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > It is not for application, it is for PMD itself, w/o exposing the symbols build
> > > failed.
> > >
> > > PMD is implementing this trace endpoints, not consuming this trace point.
> > > Right? If so, Why to expose these symbols?
> >
> > As far as understand:
> > The tracepoint routines are defined in dedicated common/mlx5_trace.c file.
> > The tx_burst in mlx5 is implemented as template in header file, and this
> > template is used in multiple .c files under net/mlx5 filder.
> > So, common/mlx5 should expose its symbols to net/mlx5 to allow successful
> > linkage.
>
> OK. I missed the fact the these are in common code and net driver is
> depened on that.
> So changes makes sense.
It does not make sense to me.
These are tracepoints for the ethdev driver.
Why declaring them in the common library?
More information about the dev
mailing list