From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE6AA0A02;
	Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:22:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F1E140E8A;
	Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:22:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67791140CEC
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 18:22:26 +0100 (CET)
IronPort-SDR: t4fvvmKWjGq3XtumsxBAWBeYdvnVlt3ffrciotkY9Y3/pAXxiwXJ4aq6IADvTGAfkHO6LGnbgW
 D4t33lSFtvzA==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9863"; a="165328669"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,344,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="165328669"
Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65])
 by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 13 Jan 2021 09:22:25 -0800
IronPort-SDR: ES4eTSVLSDBwNSyT/0ORH4BATzacSKK1IgcbCItHFKInh/4L9b/QepD7WdgHyBhtujjcThIShe
 mqCapHNkFGpw==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,344,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="381935241"
Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.253.108])
 ([10.213.253.108])
 by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 13 Jan 2021 09:22:22 -0800
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "McDaniel, Timothy" <timothy.mcdaniel@intel.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>, Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>,
 Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>,
 David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 "thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>,
 "Macnamara, Chris" <chris.macnamara@intel.com>
References: <cover.1610377084.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <cover.1610473000.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <f32d9217045ba88e93a708c9d07858dfda8c8447.1610473000.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <BYAPR11MB33011764CC5C75F6A9FEE89D9AA90@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Message-ID: <0eee7584-7b3c-303a-e3a1-222eeaa0e322@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:22:20 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB33011764CC5C75F6A9FEE89D9AA90@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v16 03/11] eal: change API of power intrinsics
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 13-Jan-21 1:01 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> 
>>
>> Instead of passing around pointers and integers, collect everything
>> into struct. This makes API design around these intrinsics much easier.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
>> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Notes:
>>      v16:
>>      - Add error handling
> 
> There are few trivial checkpatch warnings, please check
> 

To paraphrase Nick Fury, I recognize that checkpatch has produced 
warnings, but given that i don't agree with what checkpatch has to say 
in this case, I've elected to ignore it :)

In particular, these warnings related to comments around struct members, 
which i think i've made to look nice and also took care of correct 
indentation in terms of code looking the same way with different tab 
widths. So, i don't think it should be changed, unless you're suggesting 
to re-layout comments on top of each member, rather than at the side 
(which i think is more readable).

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly