From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C500A0C60; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 19:30:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5655542771; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 19:30:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB224276D for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 19:30:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A1505C0139; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 14:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 04 Nov 2021 14:30:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= 0FLKIg8Fg1I5fqv/AhALC4coevJCTrMqWi5RwZy78sc=; b=EAAcOULdUQ0RtNkR 0Ot/PhaE5cRwmARtxdCYb4+Nu1BwTnYLHwT+d9z+wa6SuXtbPWWM9w5zf+w0JH2y nHDcsTA+MZHSpYGSc6iO6Onz9u8UBzVinieqMxFVcWz8h4qdbBY9SOhv1nM269qN +FaZB0pzcdIws0AadKTYrHOynmOracGTkAIkPedmf90QI5XutTzPz+AO7BYDPowi NFRH9MVN5JKajMpoaF61mXnPORFgAD6NrPoDyeW95qVUqCz4U+W0Q7RTNyXYc0au 8oig8/1ihHwuOK0JJy1ainuAlft7cB/Dq5W65O0BFZx0nCOrFav3MIER4Juv9xwT kZAD+Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=0FLKIg8Fg1I5fqv/AhALC4coevJCTrMqWi5RwZy78 sc=; b=Xcb6Vc+nWiCzl/8vqxNJ6XIENWV2hk4GlbSBcHPUHheaPyBoLCyTIY9ul MxLx6/k0XBFR0jukJLP17S8MP6Fc8QujmjYyJd4kjThqHDs14SclAREHYZyK0wvP TcgpXamR14GD+PLfZV0fUr+dmSUXwWZaVa/+MJykGTOgWsbjRG237J20pC1DSvta v4vNL/NoteW0NrR3PU8j6pX6gdUhK/9bFBwLEpJMuj57OzCulJS64ircu9HE+WUr HpvUmQUteqiYi2k0wnnMLJnWY6MQhj96BvBW0JeEwkpPlfpDNeGlZdgN7nNUFe5G JMyOtX40d0sL02gxo7yLGvak2m8qQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrtdeggddutdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 14:30:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Konstantin Ananyev Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2021 19:30:45 +0100 Message-ID: <9625908.KyOsbtCpuK@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20211101124915.9640-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> References: <20211101122444.5276-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <20211101124915.9640-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ip_frag: hide internal structures X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 01/11/2021 13:49, Konstantin Ananyev: > +/* > + * RTE IP Fragmentation and Reassembly RTE is not an entity, just a prefix. Please use "DPDK" instead, or just drop "RTE". > + * Implementation of IP packet fragmentation and reassembly. > + */ > + > +#include > + > +enum { > + IP_LAST_FRAG_IDX, /**< index of last fragment */ > + IP_FIRST_FRAG_IDX, /**< index of first fragment */ > + IP_MIN_FRAG_NUM, /**< minimum number of fragments */ > + IP_MAX_FRAG_NUM = RTE_LIBRTE_IP_FRAG_MAX_FRAG, > + /**< maximum number of fragments per packet */ > +}; > + > +/** @internal fragmented mbuf */ Why having doxygen in this file? > +struct ip_frag { > + uint16_t ofs; /**< offset into the packet */ > + uint16_t len; /**< length of fragment */ > + struct rte_mbuf *mb; /**< fragment mbuf */ > +}; [...] > -#define IP_FRAG_DEATH_ROW_MBUF_LEN (IP_FRAG_DEATH_ROW_LEN * (IP_MAX_FRAG_NUM + 1)) > +#define IP_FRAG_DEATH_ROW_MBUF_LEN \ > + (IP_FRAG_DEATH_ROW_LEN * (RTE_LIBRTE_IP_FRAG_MAX_FRAG + 1)) Namespace is wrong here. It should be fixed in another patch.