On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:54:33AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:14:30AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > Rather than explicitly clearing any setting of undefined values in our > > rte_config.h file, it's better to instead just add a comment that the > > value is not set. Using a comment allows the user to set the value using > > CFLAGS or similar mechanism without the config file clearing the value > > again. > > > > The text used "<VALUE> is not set" is modelled after the kernel approach > > of doing the same thing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > --- > > > > Although DPDK coding convention forbids use of "//" for comments, using > > regular C comment style makes the config settings less clear, as they can > > be confused with regular comments in the file. Using "//" makes them stand > > out better, so I prefer it. However, if others feel strongly, they can be > > changed to standard. > > > > Note: this is a resubmission of patch [1] which was part of a rejected > > series. However, the reasons for rejection - values in config being out > > of sync with those used for building apps - are less relevant for > > many, if not all, of these setting, so I believe the benefits for > > testing outweigh the potential downsides. If any setting is likely > > problematic, I can keep the explicit undef for that case in a new patch > > version. > > > > [1] > > http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20200903144942.671870-2-bruce.richard...@intel.com/
Acked-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roret...@linux.microsoft.com>
