[dpdk-dev,3/5] cfgfile: add support for unamed global section
Checks
Commit Message
The current implementation of the cfgfile library requires that all
key=value pairs be within [SECTION] definitions. The ini file standard
allows for key=value pairs in an unnamed section. That section is
considered the [GLOBAL] section.
This commit adds the capability of parsing key=value pairs from such an
unnamed section. The CFG_FLAG_GLOBAL_SECTION flag must be passed to the
rte_cfgfile_load() API to enable this functionality.
Signed-off-by: Allain Legacy <allain.legacy@windriver.com>
---
lib/librte_cfgfile/rte_cfgfile.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
lib/librte_cfgfile/rte_cfgfile.h | 6 ++++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
Comments
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Allain Legacy [mailto:allain.legacy@windriver.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2017 7:29 PM
> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Dumitrescu, Cristian
> <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River) <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>
> Subject: [PATCH 3/5] cfgfile: add support for unamed global section
>
> The current implementation of the cfgfile library requires that all
> key=value pairs be within [SECTION] definitions. The ini file standard
> allows for key=value pairs in an unnamed section. That section is
> considered the [GLOBAL] section.
>
> This commit adds the capability of parsing key=value pairs from such an
> unnamed section. The CFG_FLAG_GLOBAL_SECTION flag must be passed to
> the
> rte_cfgfile_load() API to enable this functionality.
>
What is the motivation for the having key/value pair outside of any section? What would be the drawback of having the user explicitly define a GLOBAL section to host these key/value pairs?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com]
>
> What is the motivation for the having key/value pair outside of any section?
> What would be the drawback of having the user explicitly define a GLOBAL
> section to host these key/value pairs?
Global parameters that are outside of sections are part of the ini informal "standard". Our app use this format.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INI_file#Global_properties
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Legacy, Allain [mailto:Allain.Legacy@windriver.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 11:04 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River) <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/5] cfgfile: add support for unamed global section
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com]
> >
> > What is the motivation for the having key/value pair outside of any
> section?
> > What would be the drawback of having the user explicitly define a GLOBAL
> > section to host these key/value pairs?
> Global parameters that are outside of sections are part of the ini informal
> "standard". Our app use this format.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INI_file#Global_properties
>
>
I am not totally against it, but IMO this option is a bit confusing. Again, what's wrong with user explicitly adding the GLOBAL section if needed?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com]
>
> I am not totally against it, but IMO this option is a bit confusing. Again, what's
> wrong with user explicitly adding the GLOBAL section if needed?
There's nothing wrong with using a global section. It is our preference to use this method because we need to support a legacy file format that needs to be parsed by other non-DPDK applications. Those applications expect this format.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Legacy, Allain [mailto:Allain.Legacy@windriver.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 11:15 AM
> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Jolliffe, Ian (Wind River) <ian.jolliffe@windriver.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/5] cfgfile: add support for unamed global section
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dumitrescu, Cristian [mailto:cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com]
> >
> > I am not totally against it, but IMO this option is a bit confusing. Again,
> what's
> > wrong with user explicitly adding the GLOBAL section if needed?
> There's nothing wrong with using a global section. It is our preference to use
> this method because we need to support a legacy file format that needs to
> be parsed by other non-DPDK applications. Those applications expect this
> format.
OK, legacy is a good enough reason for me.
@@ -108,6 +108,22 @@ struct rte_cfgfile *
memset(cfg, 0, size);
+ if (flags & CFG_FLAG_GLOBAL_SECTION) {
+ curr_section = 0;
+ allocated_entries = CFG_ALLOC_ENTRY_BATCH;
+ cfg->sections[curr_section] = malloc(
+ sizeof(*cfg->sections[0]) +
+ sizeof(cfg->sections[0]->entries[0]) *
+ allocated_entries);
+ if (cfg->sections[curr_section] == NULL) {
+ printf("Error - no memory for global section\n");
+ goto error1;
+ }
+
+ snprintf(cfg->sections[curr_section]->name,
+ sizeof(cfg->sections[0]->name), "GLOBAL");
+ }
+
while (fgets(buffer, sizeof(buffer), f) != NULL) {
char *pos = NULL;
size_t len = strnlen(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
@@ -67,6 +67,12 @@ struct rte_cfgfile_entry {
};
/**
+ * Indicates that the file supports key value entries before the first defined
+ * section. These entries can be accessed in the "GLOBAL" section.
+ */
+#define CFG_FLAG_GLOBAL_SECTION (1 << 0)
+
+/**
* Open config file
*
* @param filename