From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/28] librte_ether: add fields from
	rte_pci_driver to rte_eth_dev_data
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 18:42:56 +0100
Message-ID: <4517512.rHI39xAYOX@xps13>
References: <1446217733-9887-3-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
 <22264893.CRHp7yC71q@xps13>
 <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C219F7716B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (mail-wi0-f171.google.com
 [209.85.212.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC47F8DB1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  2 Nov 2015 18:44:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: by wijp11 with SMTP id p11so56570568wij.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:44:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C219F7716B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.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>

2015-11-02 16:44, Iremonger, Bernard:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 02/28] librte_ether: add fields from
> > rte_pci_driver to rte_eth_dev_data
> > 
> > 2015-11-02 10:36, Iremonger, Bernard:
> > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > > > 2015-10-30 15:08, Bernard Iremonger:
> > > > > add dev_flags to rte_eth_dev_data, add macros for dev_flags.
> > > > > add kdrv to rte_eth_dev_data.
> > > > > add numa_node to rte_eth_dev_data.
> > > > > add drv_name to rte_eth_dev_data.
> > > >
> > > > A commit message should explain why things are done.
> > > >
> > > > > +	uint32_t dev_flags; /**< Flags controlling handling of device.
> > > > > +*/
> > > >
> > > > Where are defined this flags? What is the scope?
> > >
> > > These flags are defined in the following file:
> > >
> > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> > >
> > > These flags are visible to all the vdevs and pdevs.
> > 
> > I mean it should be more explicit. Having an enum name will help.
> > Note: I understand your patch. I'm just asking the questions an user will ask
> > when trying to use your new API.
> > Thanks
> 
> I will try to be clearer in the commit message.
> I tried an enum for the dev_flags but it does not work well.
> There can be multiple flags set in dev_flags, it is intended to be a bit field similar to the pci flags.

Yes. You can assign some bits in an enum.
But if you prefer the defines, it's also OK if they are clearly identifiable:
with a prefix and good comments allowing to map the structure field and the flags.

> I have squashed down to 19 patches now, I don't want to over squash.

The proposal of 5 patches was good.