From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib: remove "extern" keyword for functions
	from header files
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:39:39 +0100
Message-ID: <1940526.tdz5MxOLn2@xps13>
References: <1453716075-28150-1-git-send-email-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
 <96929867.upEFuzBccp@xps13> <20160128101113.GA9647@sivlogin002.ir.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com (mail-wm0-f51.google.com [74.125.82.51])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F3EDC466
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:40:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 128so11052510wmz.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:40:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20160128101113.GA9647@sivlogin002.ir.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>

2016-01-28 10:11, Ferruh Yigit:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 07:05:52PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2016-01-25 10:01, Ferruh Yigit:
> > > Remove "extern" keywords in header files, the ones for function
> > > prototypes
> > 
> > I've seen a lot of other extern keywords. Why not removing all?
> > 
> Remaining one are Linux drivers in KNI, they are kind of internal headers, I doubt on touching them.
> Should I remove them all?
> Also there are more usage in "drivers" folder, I am not sure touching them too, what do you comment?
> 
> > > -extern int rte_eth_dev_configure(uint8_t port_id,
> > > -				 uint16_t nb_rx_queue,
> > > -				 uint16_t nb_tx_queue,
> > > -				 const struct rte_eth_conf *eth_conf);
> > > +int rte_eth_dev_configure(uint8_t port_id, uint16_t nb_rx_queue,
> > > +			  uint16_t nb_tx_queue,
> > > +			  const struct rte_eth_conf *eth_conf);
> > 
> > The indent is weird.
> > Why not follow the guideline with 2 tabs?
> > http://dpdk.org/doc/guides-2.2/contributing/coding_style.html#c-indentation
> 
> Intentionally kept them as original, to scope the patch just to remove a keyword.
> Do you want me fix the syntax wherever I touch for this patch?

Syntax? Do you mean to fix the indent?
Yes I think it is a good practice to fix the indent when modifying some code.