Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7] distributor_app: new sample app

["Pattan, Reshma" <reshma.pattan@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:30 PM
> To: Pattan, Reshma
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7] distributor_app: new sample app
> 
> Hi Reshma,
> 
> > > From: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
> > >
> > > A new sample app that shows the usage of the distributor library.
> > > This app works as follows:
> > >
> > > * An RX thread runs which pulls packets from each ethernet port in turn
> > >   and passes those packets to worker using a distributor component.
> > > * The workers take the packets in turn, and determine the output port
> > >   for those packets using basic l2forwarding doing an xor on the source
> > >   port id.
> > > * The RX thread takes the returned packets from the workers and enqueue
> > >   those packets into an rte_ring structure.
> > > * A TX thread pulls the packets off the rte_ring structure and then
> > >   sends each packet out the output port specified previously by the
> > > worker
> > > * Command-line option support provided only for portmask.
> > >
> > > v5 change:
> > > * Handled gracefull shutdown of rx and tx threads upon SIGINT.
> > >
> > > v6 change:
> > > * modified graceful shutdown logic to handle all threads upon SIGINT
> > > * removed call to rte_eal_pci_probe()
> > > * added seperate print_stats function
> > >
> > > v7 change:
> > > * passing NULL as rxconf/txconf parameter for rx/tx queue setup
> > > * removed zero-ed fields from port conf structure
> > > * fixed style related comments
> > >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
> >
> > Acked-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> 
> Before applying this patch, I have 2 comments:
> - Other examples directories don't have _app suffix.
> - checkpatch reports "switch and case should be at the same indent"
> 
> If you agree I will fix these 2 minor issues before applying.

Fine with me. You can proceed.

Thanks,
Reshma
> 
> Thanks
> --
> Thomas