On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 4:20 PM Ferruh Yigit [off-list ref] wrote:

On 3/11/2021 7:27 PM, Tyler Retzlaff wrote:

quoted

Introduce a meson option enable_driver_sdk when true installs internal
driver headers for ethdev. this allows drivers that do not depend on
stable api/abi to be built external to the dpdk source tree.

Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <redacted>
---

it's still unclear to me if we should be renaming the headers:

   ethdev_driver.h -> rte_ethdev_driver.h
   ethdev_pci.h -> rte_ethdev_pci.h
   ethdev_vdev.h -> rte_ethdev_vdev.h

  lib/librte_ethdev/meson.build | 5 +++++
  meson_options.txt             | 2 ++
  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/meson.build b/lib/librte_ethdev/meson.build
index c37b2e377..7ecdec6f0 100644
--- a/lib/librte_ethdev/meson.build
+++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/meson.build

@@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ headers = files('rte_ethdev.h',
      'rte_mtr_driver.h',
      'rte_tm.h',
      'rte_tm_driver.h')
+if get_option('enable_driver_sdk')
+headers += files('ethdev_driver.h',
+     'ethdev_pci.h',
+     'ethdev_vdev.h')
+endif

Instead of adding the "get_option('enable_driver_sdk')" checks to the modules,
what about a more generic solution, like:

modules assign relevant headers into a new variable, let's say 'pmd_headers',
and in a high level meson file, all 'pmd_headers' are installed if
'enable_driver_sdk' enabled?

+1.
Just, I don't like "pmd_headers" as the list name.
It can be misunderstood as the list of pmd-specific headers (thinking
of rte_pmd_i40e.h), that are exposed to applications.


-- 
David Marchand