From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Hunt, David" Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/power: add turbo functions to version.map Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 16:06:25 +0100 Message-ID: <1eefa9bb-6f61-f5ba-383f-cfe9ae62862c@intel.com> References: <1506946848-173847-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com> <1556159.HUIlaTtd6f@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16D811B252 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2017 17:06:29 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1556159.HUIlaTtd6f@xps> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Thomas On 2/10/2017 3:55 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hi, > I have some comments about the API scope and some formatting. > > Suggested title: > power: add turbo functions to map file > > 02/10/2017 14:20, David Hunt: >> allows vm_power_manager example to be built against shared libraries > Fixes: 94608a0f7f45 ("power: add per-core turbo boost API") Sure, I'll address this in next version. >> Signed-off-by: David Hunt > [...] >> +DPDK_17.11 { >> + global: >> + >> + rte_power_acpi_turbo_status; > Is it really the function you want to expose? > rte_power_turbo_status seems more generic. Not really, it was in there for completeness, but users should be able to keep track of the turbo'd cores, so not really needed. > More comments about what is part of the API: > If you do not want to expose ACPI and VM implementations, > it should not be part of the rte_* include files. > >> + rte_power_freq_disable_turbo; >> + rte_power_freq_enable_turbo; >> +}; >> + > This is a trailing new line. > > I'll address the above comments in the next version. Regards, Dave.