On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 05:25:47PM +0100, David Marchand wrote: > Hello Bruce, > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 1:54 PM Bruce Richardson > <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > This RFC attempts to reduce the amount of code duplication across a > > number of Intel NIC drivers, specifically: ixgbe, i40e, iavf, and ice. > > Thanks for starting this effort! > > > > > The first patch extract a function from the Rx side, otherwise the > > majority of the changes are on the Tx side, leading to a converged Tx > > queue structure across the 4 drivers, and a large number of common > > functions. > > > > Open question: > > * How should common code across drivers within a single device class be > > managed? > > - For now, I've created an "intel_eth" folder within the "common" > > driver directory, thinking about it after, it implies to me that > > it is common across driver classes. > > - Would it be better to create an "intel_common" directory within the > > "net" folder? > > common/ drivers currently host code that is device class agnostic, > like providing helpers to talk with hw. > No common/ driver has a dependency on some device class library. > > This series adds code that is not built into a library so there is no > need to express dependencies in meson. > But if the need arises, could it become a problem? (adding a > dependency to lib/ethdev to some drivers/common/xx/). > > > For now, I prefer the second proposition and have this code hosted in > drivers/net/. > Thanks for the feedback. While when I started this prototyping I felt that common was the right place for it, at this point I'm now tending towards this second location - keeping it in net. Any other thoughts on the relative merits of the various locations?
/Bruce
