From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70A9DA0579; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:33:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05927140FBC; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:33:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f52.google.com (mail-wr1-f52.google.com [209.85.221.52]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF164068B for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:33:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f52.google.com with SMTP id 12so5677474wrz.7 for ; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 06:33:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+LZG3JSBEc4dvCXtSvlzgwu/9X7a18skfCo7/DCQ2tg=; b=hvNfv23dW0Y+qs2NQvvrWXFsS78mXFkzSNMHm1gSTaEB6qQOjl2+ypukfZ335Cgdy3 j3uCFtscSPodpgZgiFUenu4fedkZiqHT6SR7CXzY1QBRMJkWS6BOFmy9IDfIZmlNDdQX Fs/2s5hcaD9jy/5palUwfwb5Eml7uhaW1euHHneSnUzyC0mcseHqxAIK+wMNdBcfWkNK vyfzbNHSF1QCgwa4ybZWT8+xqxLtRa+dZcL+tV11P6Aot9TVsBV6YPkG8Rzs/j/t3m5d iHJdZN2vEIW1zPc4nq706DuvsYBTjbB54PD7UbmON6rAoPXfEX9ba+eMWqHTbl8sAhMY a6zg== 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:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+LZG3JSBEc4dvCXtSvlzgwu/9X7a18skfCo7/DCQ2tg=; b=BM78dSXTe9wlHVIxIM2snBRHH+yMDvigpTUY6oFuPofgl5NjJcVlrnHi253EB26QdS uay/hzQCpQBK+pGKBwLxYlTsdQkQ194jheppnaPFAeN1VXf0e22csUa2hjfkCTvMUkeH i0HVtYiKN4W2jt6zt3f3itXol3k99muYdKbNHen8jEylSX8Z2jmpNfYCmK8uBmZbcHTy RG05dqo04+Ls4ts5fdnPWPdgw72kB6gcc4aA0NM8M+sBsN9nyZVFTJxuWkyAdKfmWpQL HTHtLG3c8lIQ1k/h5tMji9xEBZ46fwokF6az/YMmHe/WWHKaNMEs+2oPeF2MwE9I6Vpl Wk3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Xram8QFfZLN03gjozzV0hCEnvE3K1bRRCVDFdCUhrzwt0erTA W95ubvaB30glDhK6V65hKWPMPQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxlOZK9YYnfZzLyHp8aJh1pEP9jMf5YAlhjU1N3ecTxhQGI5fBvw1mhR+7Yg0dCYE9sQMVqqA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5291:: with SMTP id c17mr18148711wrv.110.1617975201436; Fri, 09 Apr 2021 06:33:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com ([2a01:e0a:5ac:6460:c065:401d:87eb:9b25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a7sm4892905wrn.50.2021.04.09.06.33.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 09 Apr 2021 06:33:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:33:20 +0200 From: Olivier Matz To: Dmitry Kozlyuk Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Tyler Retzlaff , Jie Zhou , Nick Connolly , Beilei Xing , Jeff Guo , Matan Azrad , Shahaf Shuler , Viacheslav Ovsiienko , Narcisa Ana Maria Vasile , Dmitry Malloy , Pallavi Kadam , Thomas Monjalon , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko Message-ID: <20210409133320.GC1650@platinum> References: <20210403234129.20296-1-dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com> <20210407222249.6729-1-dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com> <20210407222249.6729-5-dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com> <20210408114541.GV1650@platinum> <20210408225134.316758e8@sovereign> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210408225134.316758e8@sovereign> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 4/4] net: provide IP-related API on any OS X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:51:34PM +0300, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote: > 2021-04-08 13:45 (UTC+0200), Olivier Matz: > [...] > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c > > > index c572d003cb..e7361bf520 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c > > > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > > > > > If I understand the logic, rte_ip.h provides OS-specific IP-related > > stuff (like IPPROTO_*), and rte_os_shim.h provides the POSIX definitions > > that are missing after including rte_ip.h. > > > > Would it make sense to include rte_os_shim.h from rte_ip.h, so that > > including rte_ip.h is always sufficient? Or is it because we want to > > avoid implicit inclusion of rte_os_shim.h? > > Yes, currently rte_os_shim.h is not exposed at all. > It it ever will, this reason still applies. Ok, thank you for the clarification. Acked-by: Olivier Matz