On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:31:08 +0200 Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 22/07/2019 19:13, Stephen Hemminger: > > Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> wrote: > > > Are the constructors run on dlopen of the bus driver? > > > > Yes, constructors are run on dlopen. > > But application should not have to ask DPDK to dlopen the bus devices. > > > > The core principle is that dynamic build of DPDK should act the same as old > > statically linked DPDK. Otherwise, the user experience is even worse, and > > all > > the example documentation is wrong. > > OK, this is where I wanted to bring the discussion. > You are arguing against a design which is in DPDK from some early days. > So this is an interesting discussion to have. > Do we want to change the "plugin model" we have? > Or do we want to simply drop this model (dlopen calls) > and replace it with strong dynamic linking? I argue that examples should work the same with dynamic linking. This used to work before the break out of the bus model, so it is a bug. For distributions, this also matters. Linking with -ldpdk which is a linker script should work.
