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 63F1D43DE9; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:53:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDFA34025D; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:53:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B4240150 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:52:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7805A139F; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 08:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.38.52] (FVFG51LCQ05N.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.38.52]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A55673F6C4; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 08:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4591dac5-5462-41c4-a0c2-2a37dafd0ea2@arm.com> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:52:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] dts: add parameters data structure Content-Language: en-GB To: Jeremy Spewock Cc: dev@dpdk.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Juraj_Linke=C5=A1?= , Jack Bond-Preston , Honnappa Nagarahalli References: <20240326190422.577028-1-luca.vizzarro@arm.com> <20240326190422.577028-2-luca.vizzarro@arm.com> From: Luca Vizzarro In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Thank you for your review Jeremy! On 28/03/2024 16:48, Jeremy Spewock wrote: > I might add some kind of block comment here as a separator that > delimits that metadata modifiers start here. Something like what is > written in scapy.py which creates sections for XML-RPC method vs ones > that are run by the docker container. This isn't something strictly > necessary, but it might help break things up and add a little more > explanation. > You could do the same thing here for mixins, but again, I'm not sure > it's really necessary. Yes, I agree that using block comments to delimit sections is a good idea. I wasn't sure if we had an established way of doing this, and looks like we do!