From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17C5A68BE for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:15:18 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r20so2758917wiv.0 for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:15:17 -0800 (PST) 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=HGhl+S+jA6s/9bBsDZNRTeQJhi+knXBBSUYLtBaz+NI=; b=As+a+inFNEGK8Nq63VaT80P8RzLpxuJJYrc49o4v54PhKV7vuVrUBXxZ+cxGVsl5Ah jsbsNCk7H3D8Spjs0hUCueTFX/n44QGsoKMTg5eQrxAHP9D0zFcNlrjm0T1jaVbF499k edC/IO6NYxvcN5L1DYCq7bYNzsJuFiGeJzHmyVFiGCqdoUgdI1sRFmdIqleUFgcImPXd zVN0T3kWV+n8ZizA8c/agadXNqJfcQRJnGZpLj3rpUOPPIc78gi7+Z2MK1znV0Z+9Vbu l9MwgsbI1QjJoCrAqh5cB4/ooFlp1NfmCXFgs/FXGw/KwOo0Q6nWmangDLCiFE4XVNiR RwXw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk19MpTXH1P2TihrC9yBFZ/T/4kB+TUzX53H3qarCkvRWc5g3sjNxUrysVABv5+7xhyi0hM X-Received: by 10.180.76.211 with SMTP id m19mr1429670wiw.73.1418332517904; Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:15:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet ([88.249.222.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l10sm654187wif.20.2014.12.11.13.15.16 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Dec 2014 13:15:17 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Neil Horman Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 22:14:45 +0100 Message-ID: <21834202.ss7NCRa1zk@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.17.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20141211141727.GC28213@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1415381289-43291-1-git-send-email-jyu@vmware.com> <30845403.kPBAiWVWY3@xps13> <20141211141727.GC28213@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] lib: include rte_memory.h for __rte_cache_aligned 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: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 21:15:18 -0000 2014-12-11 09:17, Neil Horman: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:36:54AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > Hi Neil, > >=20 > > 2014-12-10 19:28, Neil Horman: > > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 07:09:03PM +0000, Jia Yu wrote: > > > > Hi Neil, > > > >=20 > > > > Moving __rte_cache_aligned right after struct keyword will help= . On the > > > > other hand, enforcing this rule for existing (100+) and future = definitions > > > > will be difficult. It=B9s clearer and a good practice to includ= e header file > > > > explicitly. > > > >=20 > > > You need to include the header file regardless of what you do. T= he advantage to > > > placing the macro right after the struct keyword is that failure = to include the > > > header will result in a compiler error, rather than silent behavi= oral changes > > > and run time breakage. > > >=20 > > > You don't have to enforce putting the attribute after the struct = keyword, I'd > > > say just move them now to protect the current code. Subsequent p= atch authors > > > will see the existing style and follow suit. Or they won't, and = we'll point out > > > the issue during review. > >=20 > > It should be a different patch for next release cycle. > > Let's apply this fix only for 1.8.0. > >=20 > Why? Theres no harm in doing so now. It's a coding style good practice, not a bug fix. We are now integrating only bug fixes and docs. We have to put a limit to avoid last minutes bugs. --=20 Thomas