From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CCE0677B for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:37:44 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hi2so677974wib.1 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:46:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=XmtKqmPjvQlOe2350g7nRNRw8qRnL9fMcbO2ExwEbLs=; b=QamnxQ6SZhG07IGqXAp5QWUT3dN7bvM8XR5iXiETcScp0lpqIfgLAFKQ4Jc7kK99SV pOLfnDnU1APREDm8Sh4NI8kf2CfRHIsvU3rw2Frz1Ke0UDpQD8aBTPiQjDPPD0SB7s5+ hF8gR04ogWSF4wPHste+YWa/4/2xckRQzSQKGFplEALBhT3zMRJqx03cxaEFM/0ql3Sn giFPENAxAibPPCYbPXKbZ1P7dEIo8o+pkkcBrJmIDce//w+/iYBjLoZ5JZtvoblQVTDU LSOGqVZBnsMWtIaa2xwQs32ffncasqPGYkOH+N4v/IT5Y2RqPHqJU6K5dFeEReUYbbaj jGAQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmwqeidqXaL+FFsA9mzR0Bhhz5uqfKdfPkUVozn/yNd1mAoPPS+sZkGLACiqqpKQ+FqhaVQ X-Received: by 10.195.11.6 with SMTP id ee6mr5653035wjd.95.1414745204459; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:46:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fr6sm11645747wic.1.2014.10.31.01.46.43 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Oct 2014 01:46:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Zhang, Helin" Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:46:25 +0100 Message-ID: <1805380.mAoYbZuahn@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.2 (Linux/3.17.1-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.2; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1411634427-746-1-git-send-email-helin.zhang@intel.com> <1959774.p5xijEU5zU@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 7/8] ethdev: support of multiple sizes of redirection table 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: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:37:44 -0000 2014-10-31 01:39, Zhang, Helin: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > 2014-10-28 00:37, Zhang, Helin: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > 2014-10-22 19:53, Helin Zhang: > > > > > +#define RTE_BIT_WIDTH_64 (CHAR_BIT * sizeof(uint64_t)) > > > > > > > > How can it be different of 64? > > > > Using 64 would be simpler to understand than RTE_BIT_WIDTH_64. > > > > > > > > > + uint8_t reta[RTE_BIT_WIDTH_64]; /**< 64 redirection table entries. */ > > > We always try to use macro in code to replace numeric, this can get the numeric > > more understandable. > > > > How bit width 64 is more understandable than 64? > > Especially when you count a number of entries, not a bit width. > > RETA_ENTRIES_MAX would be more understandable. > > Renaming the macro is needed. I plan to rename it to RTE_RETA_GROUP_SIZE, > as it is a group of 64 reta entries, but not the maximum number of valid entries. OK, good. -- Thomas