09/05/2018 18:11, Bruce Richardson: > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 04:59:39PM +0100, Van Haaren, Harry wrote: > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Anatoly Burakov > > > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 1:09 PM > > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] Clean up EAL runtime data paths > > > > > > As has been suggested [1], all DPDK runtime paths should be put > > > into a single place. This patchset accomplishes exactly that. > > > > > > If running as root, all files will be put under /var/run/dpdk/<prefix>, > > > otherwise they will be put under $XDG_RUNTIME_PATH/dpdk/<prefix>, or, if > > > that environment variable is not defined, all files will go under > > > /tmp/dpdk/<prefix>. > > > > > > [1] http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/38688/ > > > > > > v2: > > > - Rebase on rc1 > > > > > > Anatoly Burakov (4): > > > eal: remove unused define > > > eal: rename function returning hugepage data path > > > eal: add directory for DPDK runtime data > > > eal: move all runtime data into DPDK runtime dir > > > > <snip> > > > > > > No full code review, high level comments: > > > > We have to be careful in changing /var/run/.rte_config, which has always > > been > > the default DPDK primary application lockfile. This has been used to > > identify > > if a primary DPDK application is alive (see rte_eal_primary_proc_alive()) > > and > > possibly the write-lock on this file is checked by other tools/utilities > > directly > > without any DPDK function call. > > > > Changing the filepath just before a release isn't a good idea - we should > > treat > > this as an ABI/API break, as the change will break functionality in other > > projects > > such as CollectD[1], which (by default ;) rely on the defaults. There is a > > config > > file for CollectD to manually override the location, but this will cause > > headaches > > from a usability POV. > > > > I'm not opposed to the change - particularly as I gather the new memory > > subsystem > > causes a number of lockfiles to be created - but we must do our due > > diligence and > > give other projects fair-warning that this change is coming. > > > > As such, I recommend this patchset in its current form (particularly > > patches 2,3,4) > > to be deferred past 18.05. > > > > > What about if we keep the .rte_config file in the same place but move the > rest? The number of new files causes quite a bit of clutter. We can then > have a deprecation notice for the move in 18.05 and finish the cleanup in > 18.08.
I agree
