From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] i40e: add additional ieee1588 support functions Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:36:47 +0100 Message-ID: <2612413.4Q5Ch6HCxj@xps13> References: <1443799208-9408-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AB6EC2@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E258E70 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:37:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by wmeg8 with SMTP id g8so9655880wme.0 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 04:37:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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" 2015-10-30 11:33, De Lara Guarch, Pablo: > > These 3 functions above are redefined for each PMD in your patch. > > I think it is worth to move it to the upper layer (rte_ethdev, rte_net) to avoid > > code duplication. > > Thanks > > Kinstantin > > We thought about that, but we didn't know what the best place was for them. > Looking at the functions in rte_ethdev, they look quite different compared to these ones, > so we thought it wasn't the appropriate place. Do you think that is the best place? You are talking about the timer conversions, right? It looks appropriate for EAL.