From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] difficulty w/ RTE_NEXT_ABI
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 11:44:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2295250.tyqBLnBnCL@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151121084935.GA24056@mhcomputing.net>
2015-11-21 03:49, Matthew Hall:
> I was trying to rebase my DPDK onto v2.1.0 and I came across some very
> confusing code in examples/l3fwd/main.c .
>
> So... this code used the RTE_NEXT_ABI macros on a change which does not appear
> to affect the API... on a function that is marked always_inline ???
>
> Maybe I missed something but this seems pointless. An always_inline function
> is going to have to be recompiled in any case.
>
> Now I have no clue what would makes sense for my version of the function
> either... because RTE_NEXT_ABI is a binary on/off but trying to track a
> multi-variate quantity of ABI updates.
>
> For now I guess I have to write it like this inside the RTE_NEXT_ABI:
>
> rfc1812_process(struct ipv4_hdr *ipv4_hdr, uint32_t *dp, uint32_t ptype)
>
> This seems unpleasant and kind of painful. What did I miss here?
>
> Matthew.
>
> static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) void
> <<<<<<< 8e29af8a2843b6342dbc72db43ac82c9d29695bf
> #ifdef RTE_NEXT_ABI
> rfc1812_process(struct ipv4_hdr *ipv4_hdr, uint16_t *dp, uint32_t ptype)
> #else
> rfc1812_process(struct ipv4_hdr *ipv4_hdr, uint16_t *dp, uint32_t flags)
> #endif
The new mbuf provides packet type instead of flags.
So the processing in this function is changed and the variable name is
different to reflect this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-21 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-21 8:49 Matthew Hall
2015-11-21 10:44 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2015-11-22 0:25 ` Matthew Hall
2015-11-22 20:59 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-11-22 23:25 ` Matthew Hall
2015-11-23 0:13 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-11-23 3:53 ` Matthew Hall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2295250.tyqBLnBnCL@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=mhall@mhcomputing.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).