From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Declan Doherty Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added missing extern 'C' decls in mode4 header files Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:15:59 +0000 Message-ID: <54CB75FF.4090807@intel.com> References: <1422362703-18868-1-git-send-email-pawelx.wodkowski@intel.com> <3047657.sxLCa6eQXg@xps13> <54CB6E1F.6040907@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: "Wodkowski, PawelX" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On 30/01/15 12:11, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Doherty, Declan > > Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 12:42 PM > > To: Wodkowski, PawelX; Thomas Monjalon > > Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Added missing extern 'C' decls in mode4 header > > files > > > > On 30/01/15 10:56, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote: > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > >>> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:21 AM > >>> To: Wodkowski, PawelX > >>> Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > >>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Added missing extern 'C' decls in mode4 > > header > >>> files > >>> > >>> Hi Pawel, > >>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Pawel Wodkowski > >>>> --- > >>>> lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_8023ad.h | 8 ++++++++ > >>>> lib/librte_pmd_bond/rte_eth_bond_8023ad_private.h | 8 ++++++++ > >>> > >>> Why adding extern C in a private header file? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Thomas > >> > >> To be consistent with rte_eth_bond_private.h where it is included. > >> > >> > > > > We only need the decls on the public headers exported by the > > librte_pmd_bond makefile, so there is no need to modify > > rte_eth_bond_private.h as it should never be linked to directly by > > external code. > > I modified rte_eth_bond_8023ad_private.h not rte_eth_bond_private.h. > In rte_eth_bond_private.h those declarations are present already. > If so those declarations should be removed from rte_eth_bond_private.h. > > I can do this in v2 if you accept this. > Sure, that sounds good to me.