23/03/2021 19:56, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > 23/03/2021 19:07, P, Venkata Suresh Kumar: > > > Thanks a lot for reviewing the code and providing your comments. > > > > > > I have addressed below comments in V2 patch. > > > > OK thanks. > > > > What about the question about rte_trace? > > Opinions? > > Hi Thomas, > > All rte_swx_port ports are currently following this pattern, > so it makes sense to have this one do the same for now. > > I am not that familiar with the (relatively new) rte_trace mechanism, so I am > not sure if it has any run-time performance (I am assuming that it doesn't). > We will take the AR to take a look at rte_trace and come back with a patch to > convert traces for all ports to rte_trace, most likely in the 21.05 time > frame. Is this OK for you?
Yes, would be great. In general we should avoid such #ifdef in DPDK code. Maybe rte_trace can help, maybe rte_log levels would suffice. Note there is RTE_LOG_DP_LEVEL for logging in datapath.
