From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: introduce big and little endian types Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:30:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20161208093005.GD21794@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, Olivier Matz To: dev@dpdk.org, "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Bruce Richardson , "Wiles, Keith" , Morten =?iso-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , Neil Horman Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3D82A5E for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:30:13 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id a197so207849830wmd.0 for ; Thu, 08 Dec 2016 01:30:13 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 all, Following previous discussions, I would like to gather requirements for v2, currently we have: 1. Introduction of new typedefs. 2. Modification of network headers. 3. Modification of rte_*_to_*() functions. Point 1. seems not to be an issue, everyone seems to agree on the fact having those types could help to document some parts of the code. Point 2. does not cause any ABI change as it is only a documentation commit, not sure if anyone disagrees about this. Point 3. documentation commit most people are uncomfortable with. I propose to drop it from v2. Any objection to this plan? -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND