From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E95D275D for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:16:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id o80so18248707wme.1 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 01:16:51 -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=Wp6jmfCjGecC1hZpYJIihrIsz/6qarP417rCzJDyqRY=; b=HCcd8vpJjoGSd/zLba30wx/quZ0qptWBNWr/HRFZgtTyrTifGlX3umfAmbjgTunmS8 9DCYTtln2z4NUed0GOnSbJWGeTy2sT9gh/W9aF8kkr1DqwcSMqIVGoFAtMshZYqSinMB Bbgt39FP+54i3kQWepm9HGAgoaCYduAnEM5Zt8XloLY2crL4RA2Ttg/3D9/1sCNibooE 18iUZtpXctskWtyg39pJMY+4fObLn88lL7qFROwEMbuFDCAUhZqv/cUoCMie5uD/hhZA APbw6hHAnKFS0tQeZwRAHHboX5suRdCY3UMs5FW6Daup++JLlihh45/mFEdmlgwpOUvo RLoA== 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=Wp6jmfCjGecC1hZpYJIihrIsz/6qarP417rCzJDyqRY=; b=Bp7er/g73tZtVHq+F5vIDP5JPzvWdTSn0WnhiGxj4qXEnPRX+/7q0yhGzQlrXbjJc0 qnbSKHFfYO2iCeVq+zy9Nahfj/NJh58Ye7rMclQ19okAJ5kZO7regMO6dhZFPmZCntjV 3r2U6UzRiIF7Uei0g7Omyl+ssP01wA4izmmfdrCSHOO2MRk/R3MCKVBxkC6Sbd1U2VKD qvH3jBoPeieTAjZr2h8KxZnL3umteYhmkHrrnB9DupXX2EDt3TXRRaZ7c+EoUwqAQV8B DDB+Pbej2C1qtGuH2NAeziGZ1HuHSx5WYGIj0KSDjRlEU+xrbiwIQF8xftUgutJ5LZId B6LQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIkKXE27Ikz7b3P/dO+qSVRZf0HJivQLATn9KrYndjgjralq5j34ByD0aU2SF5sU7ZP X-Received: by 10.28.47.7 with SMTP id v7mr14686461wmv.38.1468570610969; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 01:16:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 17sm4396771wmf.6.2016.07.15.01.16.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 01:16:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Wiles, Keith" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Damjan Marion (damarion)" , "viktorin@rehivetech.com" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "david.marchand@6wind.com" Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:16:48 +0200 Message-ID: <2619559.1L0JRy07Sv@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20AB3D71-1CAA-48BE-A764-3C17C35F0072@intel.com> References: <1468531886-34205-1-git-send-email-keith.wiles@intel.com> <6049792.6bXVORrbVs@xps13> <20AB3D71-1CAA-48BE-A764-3C17C35F0072@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] spinlock:move constructor function out of header X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 08:16:51 -0000 2016-07-14 22:45, Wiles, Keith: > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 2:59 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > Thanks Keith for continuing work. > > > > 2016-07-14 14:31, Keith Wiles: > >> lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/eal/Makefile | 1 + > >> lib/librte_eal/common/arch/arm/rte_spinlock.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> lib/librte_eal/common/arch/ppc_64/rte_spinlock.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> lib/librte_eal/common/arch/tile/rte_spinlock.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> lib/librte_eal/common/arch/x86/rte_spinlock.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> .../common/include/arch/x86/rte_spinlock.h | 14 ++----- > >> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile | 1 + > > > > I am not sure we should add a .c file for each arch, given it is called only > > from arch/x86/rte_spinlock.h. > > I did not like having the .c for everyone, but the previous comment seemed > to suggest it. I am willing to change it any better method, just let me > know what you think. I would like just one. I will make sure it is not needed. In this case, we can keep the original patch from Damjan and just do some trivial changes. I can make them quickly before RC3. > On a side note I have combined the bsdapp and linuxapp into a single > directory before. It is doable and it eliminates a number of duplicate > files or code. Yes patches to remove duplicated code are welcome. But please do not introduce more #ifdefs. I think it is better to keep separate directories bsdapp/ and linuxapp/ while increasing the shared code in common/ as much as possible. Some functions are really different and are better handled separately. > Plus a also added support for OS X for DPDK, but I do not have access > to any NICs with that version yet other then virtual ones. > I could submit it and may be someone will write the kext to make it work. :-) Maybe that OS X would deserve a third separate directory. I guess you wanted it only for dev testing? Why not just use a Linux or FreeBSD VM?