On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 13:23 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 01:02:26PM +0200, Marco Varlese wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-10-01 at 12:24 +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > > On Mon, 2018-10-01 at 12:06 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 12:42:09PM +0200, Timothy Redaelli > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 01 Oct 2018 10:46:02 +0100 > > > > > Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2018-10-01 at 10:25 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 10:17:14AM +0100, Bruce > > > > > > > Richardson > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 06:58:03PM +0100, Luca Boccassi > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Allow users and packagers to override the default > > > > > > > > > dpdk/drivers > > > > > > > > > subdirectory where the PMDs get installed under $lib. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm ok with this change, but what is the current > > > > > > > > location > > > > > > > > used by > > > > > > > > distro's > > > > > > > > right now? I mistakenly never checked what was done > > > > > > > > before I > > > > > > > > used > > > > > > > > dpdk/drivers as a default value, and I'd like the > > > > > > > > default to > > > > > > > > match > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > common option if possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Replying to my own question, I've just checked on CentOS > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > Debian, > > > > > > > and it > > > > > > > appears both are using directory "dpdk-pmds" as the > > > > > > > subdir > > > > > > > name. > > > > > > > Therefore, > > > > > > > let's just make that the default. [Does it need to be > > > > > > > configurable in > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > case?] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > > If the default is the one I expect then I'm fine without > > > > > > having > > > > > > an > > > > > > option (actually happier - less things to configure). > > > > > > > > > > > > But in Debian/Ubuntu it's dpdk-MAJORVER-drivers since last > > > > > > January :-) > > > > > > We changed because using a single directory creates > > > > > > problems when > > > > > > multiple different ABI versions are installed, due to the > > > > > > EAL > > > > > > autoload > > > > > > from that directory. So we need a different subdirectory > > > > > > per ABI > > > > > > revision. > > > > > > > > > > > > We were actually talking with Timothy a while ago to make > > > > > > this > > > > > > consistent across our distros, and perhaps Marco can chip > > > > > > in as > > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > Timothy, Marco, is using dpdk-MAJORVER-$something ok for > > > > > > you? I'm > > > > > > not > > > > > > too fussy on $something, it can be drivers or pmds or > > > > > > something > > > > > > else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LGTM. > > > > > If needed, we can just do a compatibility symlink using the > > > > > current > > > > > dpdk-pmds path > > > > > > > > > > > > > One suggestion/comment. Would using a unique directory per > > > > release > > > > not lead > > > > to clobbering up the lib directory unnecessarily? How about > > > > having a > > > > single > > > > "dpdk" or "dpdk-pmds" directory in lib, and having $MAJORVER as > > > > a > > > > subdir > > > > under that? > > > > > > > > E.g. dpdk/pmds-18.08/, dpdk/pmds-18.11/, or dpdk-pmds/18.08/ > > > > dpdk-pmds/18.11 > > > > > > > > [The former of the above would be my preference, since I don't > > > > like > > > > having > > > > hypenated names, and like having "dpdk" alone as a folder name > > > > :-)] > > > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > dpdk/pmds-XX.YY/ would work for me. Timothy and Marco? > > > > That would work for us. > > However, I would suggest to have the path to be configurable > > (feature to be > > dropped in maybe next release). Just to make sure the transition > > can happen > > without pain in the remote circumstance that something goes wrong > > with > > packaging... > > > > > > > -- > > Marco V > > > > Yes, I think it needs to be configurable for the forseeable future. > If the > DPDK version is to be put in the path then we either need to always > use a > configurable version, since we can't hardcode a version number in the > default, or else we need to put logic in the meson.build file to > always > insert a version number. > > /Bruce
Ok, in v2 I added a small bit of logic to set the default to the major version number (and also the override option). -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
