DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
To: "Nélio Laranjeiro" <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
Cc: DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	"Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	"Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
	"Neil Horman" <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	"Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
	"Olivier Matz" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net: introduce big and little endian types
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 13:59:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2772CCE2-A35D-449E-922F-6EEC1F03342C@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161208093005.GD21794@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com>


> On Dec 8, 2016, at 3:30 AM, Nélio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Following previous discussions, I would like to gather requirements for
> v2, currently we have:
> 
> 1. Introduction of new typedefs.
> 2. Modification of network headers.
> 3. Modification of rte_*_to_*() functions.
> 
> Point 1. seems not to be an issue, everyone seems to agree on the fact
> having those types could help to document some parts of the code.

I never stated these new types were useful in any way, I still believe documentation of the code is the better solution then forcing yet another restriction in submitting patches. 

> 
> Point 2. does not cause any ABI change as it is only a documentation
> commit, not sure if anyone disagrees about this.

I guess no ABI change is done, but I feel it should be as the developer now need to adjust his to reflex these new type even if the compiler does not complain.

> 
> Point 3. documentation commit most people are uncomfortable with.

Not sure what this one is stating, but I whole heartily believe documentation of the code is the best way forward.

The main reasons are:
 - We do not need to add yet another type to DPDK to make the patch process even more restrictive.
 - The new types do not add any type of checking for the compiler and the developer can still get it wrong.
- If any common code used in other platform (say Linux kernel driver) we have to include these new types in that environment.
 - Documentation is the best solution IMO to resolve these types of issues and it does not require any new types or code changes in DPDK or developers code.

Sorry, I strongly disagree with this patch in any form expect documentation changes.

> I propose to drop it from v2.
> 
> Any objection to this plan?
> 
> -- 
> Nélio Laranjeiro
> 6WIND

Regards,
Keith


  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-08 13:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-09 15:04 Nelio Laranjeiro
2016-12-05 10:09 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-12-05 12:06   ` Nélio Laranjeiro
2016-12-06 11:23     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-12-06 11:55       ` Bruce Richardson
2016-12-06 12:41         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-12-06 13:34           ` Bruce Richardson
2016-12-06 14:45             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-12-06 14:56               ` Wiles, Keith
2016-12-06 15:34                 ` Morten Brørup
2016-12-06 16:28                   ` Nélio Laranjeiro
2016-12-06 16:31                     ` Wiles, Keith
2016-12-06 16:36                       ` Richardson, Bruce
2016-12-06 17:00                     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-12-06 17:29                       ` Neil Horman
2016-12-06 13:14         ` Nélio Laranjeiro
2016-12-06 13:30           ` Bruce Richardson
2016-12-06 14:06     ` Wiles, Keith
2016-12-08  9:30 ` Nélio Laranjeiro
2016-12-08 13:59   ` Wiles, Keith [this message]
2016-12-08 16:06     ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-12-08 15:07   ` Neil Horman
2016-12-08 15:10     ` Ananyev, Konstantin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2772CCE2-A35D-449E-922F-6EEC1F03342C@intel.com \
    --to=keith.wiles@intel.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).