From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85C0C2EDA
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:58:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26])
 by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2016 23:58:30 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,556,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="891373364"
Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.66.49])
 by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Jan 2016 23:58:28 -0800
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 15:59:24 +0800
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>
Message-ID: <20160112075924.GQ26062@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1446748276-132087-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <1452426182-86851-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <1452426182-86851-5-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <009b01d14d0d$47c85540$d758ffc0$@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <009b01d14d0d$47c85540$d758ffc0$@samsung.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: nakajima.yoshihiro@lab.ntt.co.jp, mst@redhat.com, dev@dpdk.org,
 ann.zhuangyanying@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] virtio/vdev: add a new vdev named
	eth_cvio
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 07:58:30 -0000

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:45:59AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>  Hello!
> 
>  See inline

Hi,

Please strip unrelated context, so that people could reach to your
comments as quick as possible, otherwise, people could easily get
lost from the long patch.

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jianfeng Tan [mailto:jianfeng.tan@intel.com]
> > +	struct rte_mbuf *m = NULL;
> > +	if (dev->dev_type == RTE_ETH_DEV_PCI)
> > +		vq->offset = (uintptr_t)&m->buf_addr;
> > +#ifdef RTE_VIRTIO_VDEV
> > +	else {
> > +		vq->offset = (uintptr_t)&m->buf_physaddr;
> 
>  Not sure, but shouldn't these be swapped? Originally, for PCI devices, we used buf_physaddr.

And this reply just servers as an example only :)

	--yliu