From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D165F2B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:39:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rsa59-2-82-233-193-189.fbx.proxad.net ([82.233.193.189]
 helo=droids-corp.org)
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256)
 (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1fXiZe-0003hC-Df; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:39:40 +0200
Received: by droids-corp.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation);
 Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:39:04 +0200
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:39:04 +0200
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Dan Gora <dg@adax.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20180626073904.nsieqomdqq3xmr62@platinum>
References: <20180618233534.21611-1-dg@adax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180618233534.21611-1-dg@adax.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] mbuf: add accessor function for
	private data area
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:39:08 -0000

Hi Dan,

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 04:35:34PM -0700, Dan Gora wrote:
> Add an inline accessor function to return the starting address of
> the private data area in the supplied mbuf.
> 
> This allows applications to easily access the private data area between
> the struct rte_mbuf and the data buffer in the specified mbuf without
> creating private macros or accessor functions.
> 
> No checks are made to ensure that a private data area actually exists
> in the buffer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Gora <dg@adax.com>

Thank you for this patch.

Few (late) comments to your previous questions:

- about rte_mbuf vs rte_pktmbuf, as Andrew said pktmbuf was used in
  the past when there was a ctrlmbuf. This one has been removed now, so
  mbuf should be used.

- I agree that removing the test (m->priv_size == 0) is better for
  the reasons mentionned, and also because it would add a test in the
  dataplane area, which would sometimes be useless: the application create
  the mbuf pools, so it can know that all mbufs have a priv area.


Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>