> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 10:55 AM > To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com>; Van Haaren, Harry > <harry.van.haa...@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith <keith.wi...@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce > <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/7] service cores: header and implementation > > 11/07/2017 10:29, Jerin Jacob: > > IMO, We don't need to expose rte_service_private.h to application. If > > you agree, add the following or similar change > > If it must not be exposed, the file should not have the prefix rte_ > In doc/api/doxy-api.conf, every files with rte_ prefix will be processed > for doxygen documentation: > FILE_PATTERNS = rte_*.h
The service registration API should be exposed to the application. Imagine a use case where the application wants to run services *and* an application specific function on the same core. In the current implementation this is possible, as the application can register a service. The app then configures all services (including its own "app-service") to run on a service lcore. If we hide the service registration from the application, we make it impossible for the application to multiplex services and application specific workloads on a single core. I strongly prefer of leaving the header as is. Given we have EXPERIMENTAL tag, ABI/API are not a concern until later - we have time to figure out if the service-registration API is good enough in current form, before we commit to it. I'll send v5 asap with headers as is.
