From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wj0-f173.google.com (mail-wj0-f173.google.com
 [209.85.210.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB829106A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Dec 2016 17:06:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wj0-f173.google.com with SMTP id tk12so97138196wjb.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 08 Dec 2016 08:06:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=Oc2wYiWghlvMcUiNJK3muAWMj3kFHqYdkz3HoR9QITg=;
 b=HRmCDM5UCv1XuYkCIGYxD6snTvkUR14ugjbHtqTNBVcj9a5+7Sgbp7FULmSsekTPHP
 6WQjkxBeGUxrw8YBSGE8PqIokS4yhrP3f03/uop1iRtp99juDKl5yDoh2TtcQ2I8qFmH
 5JqZOLVJpRSDp5I4mqc9IQHtZZ/thVhPViNjEPQrCzMOHSd2tuwef9y1li84V5gkCQhT
 0YZDCORCadrNdSIRujV3QyssnR0D9nXbTDFisBqLI/8xoDQtR8A8055JS3GTbrkqP6EQ
 OxsgtV7ic1v6vvxOIBqUBIYJgWA4UFbRF1Wpm9Z4G9eM6BUGoY4YJgoL+HmCyw9HGvZ8
 xiEQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent
 :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=Oc2wYiWghlvMcUiNJK3muAWMj3kFHqYdkz3HoR9QITg=;
 b=WPPYiErOIZlbYuZCwZoHNO61P5Cn/BNZ9VxuV1Uclw6y05VGbG+pX+bZgY3oBqE8dM
 G9+Ab5Iuq6pcworssPk5zFzdurIGt5Ux5PnIwdAdFjOpXdu42GjiOiAp3nig6ndfHzCo
 XILrvf+mh30vVdCsB4PVBqoMYU4qt7v6ss9FqMJ1tBukvoQSSo6LF28xTUDwg3sbZHdO
 FuyEd+NVTZr8Md4lCkgHYwDIL17wA/5mS1yqvpHOmDUbWfcINdnz1Uh3twc+H+xl69Iu
 JZsYyw2+YLK2I5tu2+bxUuplTJp8eD4ysU1tMoISIUCfie8kRM5vODOU70ToW4qhKpzc
 KBGg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00zyuX95IamUbXTMZDnyvnKhm4BVu0CZ4U4obbRKSsKqqXTy4LL7kqTwfbVzjh8lGez
X-Received: by 10.194.23.67 with SMTP id k3mr66091366wjf.103.1481213201235;
 Thu, 08 Dec 2016 08:06:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i10sm37748202wjd.15.2016.12.08.08.06.40
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Thu, 08 Dec 2016 08:06:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org,
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>, "Ananyev,
 Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "Richardson,
 Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
 Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
 Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 17:06:39 +0100
Message-ID: <1568168.EhulpLP1hk@xps13>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <2772CCE2-A35D-449E-922F-6EEC1F03342C@intel.com>
References: <a55f9700134c2b5e83b4806df573aefa0c4bab03.1478703591.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
 <20161208093005.GD21794@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com>
 <2772CCE2-A35D-449E-922F-6EEC1F03342C@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net: introduce big and little endian types
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 16:06:41 -0000

2016-12-08 13:59, Wiles, Keith:
>=20
> > On Dec 8, 2016, at 3:30 AM, N=E9lio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6w=
ind.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > Hi all,
> >=20
> > Following previous discussions, I would like to gather requirements=
 for
> > v2, currently we have:
> >=20
> > 1. Introduction of new typedefs.
> > 2. Modification of network headers.
> > 3. Modification of rte_*_to_*() functions.
> >=20
> > Point 1. seems not to be an issue, everyone seems to agree on the f=
act
> > having those types could help to document some parts of the code.
>=20
> I never stated these new types were useful in any way, I still believ=
e documentation of the code is the better solution then forcing yet ano=
ther restriction in submitting patches.=20

It would not be a restriction, just a help for those wanting to documen=
t
some tricky parts by using these types.

I see 2 usages:

- in a struct:

rte_be32_t speed; /**< 0 for speed negotiation */
instead of
uint32_t speed; /**< [big endian] 0 for speed negotiation */

- in a function:

rte_be32_t decode_speed (void *);
[...]
speed =3D rte_be_to_cpu_32(decode_speed());

It is difficult to reject something which could help a bit.
Do you really think it would bring some confusion to have some code
using these endianed-types?