From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f46.google.com (mail-lf0-f46.google.com [209.85.215.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C6596CB5 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 17:51:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf0-f46.google.com with SMTP id x79so48884994lff.0 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OUeuxG2IaM+SQKsScik0A/bc8zoz84B94f/OravgHXc=; b=LTcEwFvObvsKuJuvWWB114hgLtesZYZ/+d1mexUKAxzWrZ5lTfpluwbWoVT3v4R0D6 o/jZmf5XNNiY0XJdUo4+wS6cukZT8u5jurd+oQ1Xqu+5ObosWuaRYyXlNsbNtjvSv/xc QAdG94pqqyJSdGaGoyGnk9bB4EgL3C9mzcwpjGSe9z2bm5/mK/Juwgdva6tNT5kha/nH u8jDEjcD+gD76bRQL2FqdyzLqR4owfKcr95MEhPdYl/b+YkCku/nz3xFBzASHPbIbl2L qbCY1ZFB63GeG4fAg6sJHtAJShozmQzBHxcQUr9awXlX3brarXszIbDtwdYmWuU9rsSU 4Uzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OUeuxG2IaM+SQKsScik0A/bc8zoz84B94f/OravgHXc=; b=Z8D5HXYiY8Adiu/HoAFmQLEIHiHAg39sb1xBopA/5Dr/r0Iv+LbDPtipM9n1zus7v1 3cbZzFiF35bz3VEUsVTSU7hkZ+a0ARdyi0zwsSjySJKNmLgCBWAE9CbQsF/KCb0ZDqeZ gFb6ifS+hkU86FPUn9x3qXB/FtQ/lSnGjlogIdKQU1nLlBlkpLH6grva87LjoAmCe/7I o9e2h+izC8CxWz32flLfZNrneUHCXKw2hUkCyLSZX3C9N830HlZUcVrl3OdIyNcj1wE4 pQFvEal35+pXm4r9Z4W9w1T0EveNtbeGu4qSF2qhCZVmKRcR5/U4Wa/J3rINt+boVMFQ jeqA== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9RnwSRz3shc2lUQyOtsq3x8QOTASjgR6Um5t4OtxMl9Okz+K/da8+w1Aqy6PWXWJ0X6t X-Received: by 10.25.43.12 with SMTP id r12mr3604688lfr.104.1476201062110; Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j124sm1144832lfe.3.2016.10.11.08.51.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 08:51:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 17:51 +0200 From: Thomas Monjalon To: Olivier MATZ Cc: dev@dpdk.org, cunming.liang@intel.com, john.mcnamara@intel.com, andrey.chilikin@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com Message-ID: <1648264.CA3faU4kLD@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <57FCAA7A.6020201@6wind.com> References: <1472481335-21226-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <2178965.8ItUXrjgAs@xps13> <57FCAA7A.6020201@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 03/16] mbuf: move packet type definitions in a new file X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 15:51:02 -0000 2016-10-11 11:01, Olivier MATZ: > Hi Thomas, > > On 10/10/2016 04:52 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-10-03 10:38, Olivier Matz: > >> The file rte_mbuf.h starts to be quite big, and next commits > >> will introduce more functions related to packet types. Let's > >> move them in a new file. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz > >> --- > >> lib/librte_mbuf/Makefile | 2 +- > >> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 495 +---------------------------------- > >> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_ptype.h | 552 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > Why not moving packet type and other packet flags in librte_net? > > These are mbuf features. Yes there is some space reserved in the mbuf for these bits. > I can reverse the question: why moving them in librte_net? :) Fair enough :) I was thinking to group protocol-related definitions in librte_net. But both approaches are acceptable. OK to keep the packet types in mbuf lib.