From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruce Richardson Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 24/40] bnxt: add HWRM ring alloc/free functions Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 13:45:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20160526124555.GF7708@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1463179589-82681-1-git-send-email-stephen.hurd@broadcom.com> <1463179589-82681-24-git-send-email-stephen.hurd@broadcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Stephen Hurd Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6C77377C for ; Thu, 26 May 2016 14:45:59 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1463179589-82681-24-git-send-email-stephen.hurd@broadcom.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 03:46:13PM -0700, Stephen Hurd wrote: > Add HWRM calls to allocate and free TX/RX/CMPL rings along with > the associated structs and definitions. > What are these RX/TX/CMPL rings used for? I assume they are different from the RX/TX rings used to send/receive packets, or am I missing something? Also, I see some compilation errors after applying this patch in the series. gcc gives errors about "struct bnxt_ring_struct declared inside parameter list". /Bruce PS: having "struct" at the end of the name of "struct bnxt_ring_struct" seems superflous. Since we don't use typedefs in DPDK, the keyword struct will always appear before the definition, so it shouldn't be needed in the name too.