From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb
	segments
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:05:57 +0200
Message-ID: <53564501.0VCaTE2lYi@xps>
References: <1488966121-22853-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <130C769A-180F-4C74-A974-EA51E7FAD1EC@intel.com>
 <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC359EB27E@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>,
 Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "Wang,
 Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "Richardson,
 Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Chilikin,
 Andrey" <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>,
 nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com,
 jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
To: Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E3E3250
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 17:05:58 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC359EB27E@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Br=F8rup:
> Morten Br=F8rup wrote:
> > Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
> > > introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
> > > step when everyone uses this new type.
> >=20
> > I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable
> > types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the
> > unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be
> > changed everywhere.
> >=20
> > Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files
> > at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution
> > will it be beneficial.
[...]
> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type definit=
ions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type needs to cha=
nge from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including in the ethdev APIs.
>=20
> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of this v=
ariable.

So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?

Note: I have no strong opinion.