From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FABB1B150 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 16:13:27 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2018 07:13:26 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,338,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="100363161" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2018 07:13:26 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.7) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 07:13:25 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx117.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.209]) by FMSMSX113.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.137]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 07:13:25 -0800 From: "Wiles, Keith" To: Jakub Grajciar CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] /net: memory interface (memif) Thread-Index: AQHUkHA4tMZXg+n2LE+lkegGv1SUNKV4lBiAgAAG7oA= Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:13:25 +0000 Message-ID: <92C073C7-AB56-47BE-825B-C3CE30F73EAB@intel.com> References: <20181210091457.6031-1-jgrajcia@cisco.com> <20181210100639.30244-1-jgrajcia@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.251.141.135] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <5DAC2BE5A3B208488012F6E2DF9BC23F@intel.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] /net: memory interface (memif) X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:13:28 -0000 > On Dec 10, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Wiles, Keith wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Dec 10, 2018, at 4:06 AM, Jakub Grajciar wrote: >=20 > I do not like being the coding style police, but that is most of the comm= ents here and I will try to test this one later this week. Plus I am sure I= missed some style problems, if you have not read the coding style for DPDK= please have a read. >=20 > http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/coding_style.html >=20 > One comment, why did you include all of the code to handle memif instead = of including the libmemif.a from VPP. I worry if libmemif is changed then w= e have a breakage. I do not mind the PMD being standalone and I do like not= having the dependence. >=20 > As I did not dive into the code much it does look reasonable and I hope t= o give it a try later this week. >>=20 A couple more items, do you plan on writing the documentation for the PMD a= nd provide an example program? Regards, Keith