From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 351F8C5A2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 13:38:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f50.google.com with SMTP id f126so17772373wma.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2016 04:38:20 -0700 (PDT)
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=3Y6qQYPNh6z4wxPWcKs70F0iQS/MttDdge2u52cWNqc=;
 b=bPw66+l4E8R1oNYsKJzMke1w/+fK5GAH/i0i1btnBx28vQI27u6LgXuFSVzWlUbc2/
 Uq0Ol6FWJXM/9P/MRv8xPyVOf/9SE8TchTvNjJOVoqrLUcKrCsWVl0IKDav3MKNRUZwm
 Zb4LGWVfYp+SMVRTv6Vwaq8w3OVjAngmMqGixhjyuRLpxEptGkmrUDmc4bEfQ8JtamqI
 lhjRQ8/1o8dQCkBl0CEy1y8zld3FwZBaZ5Ix/22mcND0Da25ubgp5iV59qM4FQrWf60g
 e8wL7zd2SwvyicP+tl6CsUYxAHSgg2zUPGbddsJuyviXCL5vShyYaG7/dXgV4iAR98ei
 qjyw==
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=3Y6qQYPNh6z4wxPWcKs70F0iQS/MttDdge2u52cWNqc=;
 b=lIwwQ3WEoWh2GWKF+tqt9cQFyI+NJ3uGDxft/DXaMNDVYX/hdFdOgCdcSCDI5AP+iX
 Wtz7SDLXJ+XpIb67WYzAoHv2xUC+JKlZ8KagcP6gwsb2iMTWdxivsSDwhGVcZzjixi/S
 v2Vjg/J4WF3pRlziUUnFdDywaFx8DpBE1BrFKIDxKiE+W5kOlwpRP7MKafRNznSPf/Ej
 mcNGouNAAlEl7KiHbGDCNa2pInEz0HsW5LcRPpv6zXo/jy2yWGd1ZdWAYHP3Euiaasv2
 ls6RfrACq4Mkw8G1zcayOPbOrXY2I31511LOcS0UxH+MuOltxEyX05jDoXZjc7UrXssX
 pPtQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tI5PoM+6WAHtMXaXQE/Jc4KM68Pmq8q0sn7ak2uQafQ0wswZP13nKKvvUk4hEeZdusf
X-Received: by 10.194.75.196 with SMTP id e4mr10600896wjw.44.1465990699984;
 Wed, 15 Jun 2016 04:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m5sm3798432wmm.10.2016.06.15.04.38.19
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Wed, 15 Jun 2016 04:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>,
 olivier.matz@6wind.com, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, shreyansh.jain@nxp.com
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 13:38:17 +0200
Message-ID: <2179753.hqDAO2p8Ql@xps13>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <57612E1F.4040607@intel.com>
References: <1465919341-3209-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
 <20160615121444.3db1d573@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
 <57612E1F.4040607@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/3] mempool: support external mempool
	operations
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: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:38:20 -0000

2016-06-15 11:29, Hunt, David:
> 
> On 15/6/2016 11:14 AM, Jan Viktorin wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 08:47:02 +0100
> > David Hunt <david.hunt@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> 
> [...]
> 
> >
> >> +
> >> +/** Array of registered ops structs. */
> >> +extern struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table;
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * @internal Get the mempool ops struct from its index.
> >> + *
> >> + * @param ops_index
> >> + *   The index of the ops struct in the ops struct table. It must be a valid
> >> + *   index: (0 <= idx < num_ops).
> >> + * @return
> >> + *   The pointer to the ops struct in the table.
> >> + */
> >> +static inline struct rte_mempool_ops *
> >> +rte_mempool_ops_get(int ops_index)
> > Shouldn't this function be called rte_mempool_get/find_ops instead?
> 
> Jan,
> 
>     I think at this stage that it's probably OK as it is.  :)

?
What is the justification?