From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F5CA04FB;
	Sat, 11 Jan 2020 18:42:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6751DE99;
	Sat, 11 Jan 2020 18:41:59 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail-pj1-f67.google.com (mail-pj1-f67.google.com
 [209.85.216.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976151DE95
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 18:41:57 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pj1-f67.google.com with SMTP id kx11so2315657pjb.4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 09:41:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references
 :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=pEFn+8vfs9qRgxtR2h0k9AIjBqSGZ8/qdjHppFIUMGM=;
 b=J2vSy5s6H6DiybaaKRj0gnl018Lj+07Uo/xxCBu0yWkTQMUgb4o7qzNPiIwsS39kPZ
 AbEEAJLJv8i6ZsCGAVIHv0uCI8BHRdpOIzIQ6ww0uhW2lBujATRfK0r/IvMFZHl5H9R4
 7uEyOJixiJLj8HCj5nelNnGtwUNRmgxCBhWtdj71HofH1ohw5h0F0n7xgc88wj2r8fuJ
 BbaQUjI/LamgcVHyi7NN/ZRNbFaPF3b47r09SA/Ul1kzYmTSE15L5ZLA2+fdBkeYh5WR
 VWrCjsyDVdx5W1ezyA2muqAvALGW5e3a+LXCwa15gvHuTfNaSTiJLg1CCLsW6Gw/oLPp
 N7Ew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=pEFn+8vfs9qRgxtR2h0k9AIjBqSGZ8/qdjHppFIUMGM=;
 b=FDcmdq5Ua+xgrxc4tI8QCUmUq21iUyU9PaELWBRbkOiL8YA/Bsvb44dbuwNoxm+MiY
 vN7dn//U4ye+H/66Y/5Y5FiqqicTRoR+OOSSkP5YkoiXiTOZQ8znPX4WYWZAq7A/VYA8
 g1B7dCr8es7C7po0mQsU5R29YsFJUa4DrkHINmjFkdM6cqEGR0DG/9XYbOTXw8aYjMag
 277/1lK39wOqVnLISI184G4Vo3UNCINOcCGqSkhGqk4TvvPZIiU90yepHSVYPvOp+Ft4
 7Wz7KDpWDBsUup0td9EtM003PE4/M20TlkUlZXZjhWTCaVHC7UYb5ieOIu/mg+efA+AG
 LUCg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXa56pxzicvS6R0aowcIm3nLTQlAJce3pfkYvf6ZvHF9WPD6TY0
 ts9XgRt+Y7OwIOOQRtmFVQ4ewA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx9xPWx7sGqfwI/YukmmE8xf480Un332zlIPbjnt3hKOqwu8+CNpE8vI9qbHYPAxpXS/umfcg==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ead3:: with SMTP id
 ev19mr13005791pjb.80.1578764516607; 
 Sat, 11 Jan 2020 09:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hermes.lan (204-195-22-127.wavecable.com. [204.195.22.127])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c68sm7749483pfc.156.2020.01.11.09.41.55
 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
 Sat, 11 Jan 2020 09:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 09:41:47 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: <jerinj@marvell.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <thomas@monjalon.net>, <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
 <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
 <shahafs@mellanox.com>, <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>, <gavin.hu@arm.com>,
 <viktorin@rehivetech.com>, <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
 <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, <stable@dpdk.org>
Message-ID: <20200111094147.35c1ea59@hermes.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20200111133410.2077135-1-jerinj@marvell.com>
References: <20191219134227.3841799-1-jerinj@marvell.com>
 <20200111133410.2077135-1-jerinj@marvell.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mempool: fix mempool obj alignment for
 non x86
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>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 19:04:10 +0530
<jerinj@marvell.com> wrote:

> -#define MEMPOOL_F_NO_SPREAD      0x0001 /**< Do not spread among memory channels. */
> +#define MEMPOOL_F_NO_SPREAD      0x0001
> +/**< Do not spread among memory channels. It is a hint to the library,
> + * library honor this hint only when, if it is required by the
> + * (micro) architecture.
> + */

That text is awkward for me to read.
There maybe other reasons in future for mempool to ignore the flag.

I prefer the minor change original comment as:
> -#define MEMPOOL_F_NO_SPREAD      0x0001 /**< Spreading among memory channels not required. */