From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48B441B5A4 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:39:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6DDF24146; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 08:39:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 08:39:26 -0500 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=mesmtp; bh=yQwKTAUHbKmzy5FnmFAJbYPo4O5s40otfP3kagB8T8g=; b=k2QMMM34dd7t E5vy7Ek/LkdcmM+xo7pDngyMhAASHuQe+U8DfR/Ul+KH8ee6XnqJilxilGCE823V D1XJWNpBcNvLQd5A7KKoBUj8KUBGRMB6UqJkNarwPDI/WFHBBu8A7Es8WtcMXC9r 7aMJKRHj4HijeOPgPBVOXVWZbhrERAs= 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=yQwKTAUHbKmzy5FnmFAJbYPo4O5s40otfP3kagB8T 8g=; b=X1GMbqxcgPBGuWzZvt6s3lhIbgI18U+btJlbQXbuEi+Cr45IvUyYizShh CoJF/+yMvADtENntyecrkNZpHoHIrvqxH5jc3QDBDAXZhWwTbUQiqbayY+8LrOLE SFUquglP4xa/USqIM7GzjukQXZduYV3Y5ePSxYPyZ9NZA9l/yZ8IQxMvXsE6P8o4 GB2iE4uaZSJRAS5GlgoJJekztP1R6vRIbRuHEmh/Rz3Sa4mkTu+gZ/4VUXvtj539 bQ3OfZRzIn8JEQTy/M2iU9yYuCFxA+uyXjWuKCC1/ne5TzLP8Y6UaIfsQNQEwyZK YdGIDQVksQD50PU8yuCK01Jog4QVA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtkedrudeikedgtdefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffkjg hfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcu oehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtd efrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E4EEA10086; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 08:39:24 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Cc: "Pattan, Reshma" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" , "Singh, Jasvinder" , "david.marchand@redhat.com" , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:39:23 +0100 Message-ID: <11978750.fjrl6Z7eF7@xps> In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891268E81666F@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20181123165423.134922-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> <34337288.XBznk5NxM7@xps> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891268E81666F@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] eal: add new rte color definition 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: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 13:39:28 -0000 18/12/2018 14:19, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 18/12/2018 12:18, Dumitrescu, Cristian: > > > > > I replied in v3 that it should stay in rte_meter.h. > > > > > You can include rte_meter.h in ethdev. > > > > > > > > OK, thanks Thomas, makes sense to me as well. > > > > > > > > > > Thomas, > > > > > > I agree with your input, but just want to make sure we are on the same > > page: > > > > > > Besides including rte_meter.h in ethdev (which you are fine with), we > > would also need to include rte_meter.h in mbuf. > > > > > > Are you OK with this as well? > > > > Why do we need rte_meter.h in mbuf? > > > > You probably looked at V2 only, but in V3 we have functions to set/get the color within the mbuf->hash.sched field. > > For space compression reasons, the mbuf->hash.sched stores the color on 8-bit variable, while for the outside world the set/get functions work with the 32-bit enum type. We do same thing in other places in DPDK, such as rte_crypto_op, etc. So it's a different discussion. We need to review this v3 and check how relevant this mbuf API is. If the API is accepted, yes the include should not be an issue.