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 968D06CCF for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:09:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id c78so13241923wme.1 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:09:22 -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=5oaWxVUSXyNRxuWf+AfpyR8lpknXiE7SAw6BDE4khSA=; b=PAKK+SNrvaJbCbL/b0s/xTTpyuXzpZVqZQXdXTyjhA/MuEksf+PUHV3WGi7PK18KSZ UP6dYzMpepqVgbEAqIHmWxK/0z2GXEj+F1qw7r2SQGvJMbhPKX6y3d5QXdNCitmY73/J I3JOraw/5iE3ao86pXRFSMfAqEfWIR2BPKRH2M3eQyeY2pK+MGm0xm6/Jfl2zY46w7B2 pE58GuTNqbs/6ZPaWF0PPWqsWYsfCswXX1XzfJfc2tEl5tS2xhSx4nJN6IcJZ6t9ihxS R/HzW5yTfKqhIbFZrYkF+a+xe/HahIuAX9rwWZcoNzVm1dbLBHI6XQscWVrd1OBEu//N 85/Q== 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=5oaWxVUSXyNRxuWf+AfpyR8lpknXiE7SAw6BDE4khSA=; b=T535gX1crPmd+ZcKckzmZaRk20OKf1YnRgKxGQDZm1a7BYmTAsehin/EK2c4o7hjTA 74JF1DAttlPSKvW+lWT2SOgO2H1+CMbhSXxW5I+g3e775K8aPoyu4ag5p5gU4e90/mVY PZPDL7m50ES5qUVsvHxh7HuP5iIrX/4QccChoxswpnHs2enewKFCiOz+IGgDRJKQb38o /R2tiNCYInljiL8EJjEwy+OUzcrAIjVd7MxnquBpDj4xDBAaB+TpORwi6QLLTlDEh/jH su3UrdczZFnyB/j+LlllHwU+SJxWrvJ5kqiLY+upqSFLEN8Gsh0JUKfyyQg/pJ2sxsXP UvCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rmlebib0CKDi4Vt/ggaa7AeUyyFRDrV7eNsJlHSeyPnnmYskW4Pije6LC1Yt0SChUJz X-Received: by 10.194.204.198 with SMTP id la6mr8491978wjc.2.1476256162412; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:09:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f127sm1319410wma.5.2016.10.12.00.09.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 12 Oct 2016 00:09:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: John Ousterhout Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:09:20 +0200 Message-ID: <8112016.EkWS41KYkO@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <20160928204244.8288-1-ouster@cs.stanford.edu> <39898498.0kdAxWznnB@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] log: respect rte_openlog_stream calls before rte_eal_init 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: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 07:09:22 -0000 2016-10-11 14:46, John Ousterhout: > All of your suggestions look reasonable and fairly straightforward; I'll > work on a new patch that includes them. > > Given that rte_eal_log_init is a no-op (and won't even be invoked), would > it be better to remove that function completely, and even delete the file > containing it (eal_log.c), or is it better to retain the empty function in > order to maintain a parallel structure with Linux? Personally I'd lean > towards deleting the file. As it stands, the interface to that function > doesn't even make sense for BSD; the arguments were chosen for Linux and > are ignored in BSD. > > Let me know your preference. Yes you can remove the file.