From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] vhost/example cleanup/fix
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 23:09:02 -0700
Message-ID: <20160428060902.GG25677@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1461645951-14603-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
 <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE09410342FBFF@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>
To: "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21A152C6E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 08:06:28 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE09410342FBFF@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 05:45:16AM +0000, Wang, Zhihong wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Yuanhan Liu
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:46 PM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Xie, Huawei <huawei.xie@intel.com>; Yuanhan Liu
> > <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] vhost/example cleanup/fix
> > 
> > I'm starting to work on the vhost ABI refactoring, that I also have to
> > touch the vhost example code, to make it work. The vhost example code,
> > however, is very messy, full of __very__ long lines. This would make
> > a later diff to apply the new vhost API be very ugly, therefore, not
> > friendly for review. This is how this cleanup comes.
> 
> 
> I think this patch is great effort to clean the messy code and make clearer
> logic, only one suggestion: do you think a complete cleanup would help more?

Yes, but I will stop here, and maybe do the left in near future, as I
have more important thing to do now. I even thought about to make the
VMDq and VLAN stuff optional, to not let our example connect with those
hardware feature that tight.

So, feel free to make patches to clean it further if you have time.

	--yliu