From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ob0-f173.google.com (mail-ob0-f173.google.com [209.85.214.173]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1360F9AA0 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 07:26:11 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ob0-f173.google.com with SMTP id uy5so27502717obc.4 for ; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 22:26:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=X2pN2G2kuXyMrFGWkKNwZoEo/05FoiiZJMXlfAwcbJk=; b=Pc2xOV/zu2e0/AaiKq0re/sM8GB1IQwg4zQXaMjPYLvgTFI2UfMX3pp9/JgbF8Sllm OA3MDujWPnGcG9CfJUdh1nYRGEmtMZaWeXKuS1YCPTFgvILwvaTqddQOrgwXtgkU4oey Gu+ue7LbRjCG52lwMmPW+LND/5EbOOl7MOtqX9sOp4gks75P/EELz/XNloJODcryw9rn CpOp5FpVUDdiAkU37SKKceqJXyUAmVwmB1yd1TyZWN3Xl5e/7Do1UaTbcTBhmsotwAKO HBmtadGqHQHMpNf7/Is9w5UE95GXna9HFgBC7H8S9geSpbsc/9t1cFhT72jmgnQTPYib Mdrw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmDBin4QNECWlgdQd+LmhY5vUTbFehL9QD0p+B1yQpbgzgKQghL2dOkaepndc7J6U9+03Cd MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.202.53.84 with SMTP id c81mr11223687oia.120.1422944770280; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 22:26:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.95.198 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Feb 2015 22:26:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1422899093-20207-2-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> References: <1422554832-30093-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1422899093-20207-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1422899093-20207-2-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 07:26:10 +0100 Message-ID: From: David Marchand To: Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] eal: sort and align options lists 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: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 06:26:11 -0000 Two little comments. On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > @@ -578,37 +579,36 @@ eal_check_common_options(struct internal_config > *internal_cfg) > void > eal_common_usage(void) > { > - printf("-c COREMASK -n NUM [-m NB] [-r NUM] [-b > ]" > - "[--proc-type primary|secondary|auto]\n\n" > + printf("-c COREMASK|-l CORELIST -n CHANNELS [options]\n\n" > "EAL common options:\n" > - " -c COREMASK : A hexadecimal bitmask of cores to run > on\n" > - " -l CORELIST : List of cores to run on\n" > - " The argument format is > [-c2][,c3[-c4],...]\n" > [snip] > > + " -n NUM Number of memory channels\n" > Not really a problem, but for consistency : here, you are talking about NUM, while at first, you wrote -n CHANNELS. [snip] > /* first long only option value must be >= 256, so that we won't > * conflict with short options */ > OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM = 256, > -#define OPT_HUGE_DIR "huge-dir" > - OPT_HUGE_DIR_NUM = OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM, > -#define OPT_MASTER_LCORE "master-lcore" > +#define OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR "base-virtaddr" > + OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR_NUM, > Why skip the first entry ? Afaik, OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR_NUM will be set to 257, is it to avoid having this = OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM moved anytime we add a new long option at the top of the enum ? The rest looks good to me. Acked-by: David Marchand -- David Marchand