From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F67A95D7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:31:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48])
 by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jan 2016 08:31:07 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,355,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="37145825"
Received: from irsmsx154.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.192.96])
 by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Jan 2016 08:31:06 -0800
Received: from irsmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.100]) by
 IRSMSX154.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.12.208]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002;
 Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:30:22 +0000
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, Thomas Monjalon
 <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] vfio: Support for no-IOMMU mode
Thread-Index: AQHRWQ+gWvjUvggVi0GCaGskRGjU1Z8PgsCAgAACISCAAAcvkA==
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:30:21 +0000
Message-ID: <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E45123697820C512D@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1453903474-18807-1-git-send-email-anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <1453905124-28544-1-git-send-email-anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <3176479.ZPvIliTGUP@xps13>
 <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E45123697820C50F1@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <C6ECDF3AB251BE4894318F4E45123697820C50F1@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] vfio: Support for no-IOMMU mode
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:31:06 -0000

Hi Thomas,

> > Is it possible (is it better) to declare these functions with vfio_dma_=
func_t?
>=20
> Yeah, sure. Or maybe the other way around - maybe we could do away with
> the typedef. I'll go for the former though.

No, we can't declare the functions with a function pointer. At least I don'=
t see any obvious way to do that without incurring multiple declarations co=
mpile error. So I'll leave it as forward declarations. Of course, the other=
 alternative is to put the array below the functions and make them static, =
to avoid forward declarations, but I think it's much clearer the way it is =
now.

Thanks,
Anatoly