From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mbuf/ip_frag: Move mbuf chaining to
 common code
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:11:49 +0200
Message-ID: <561D0315.7090703@6wind.com>
References: <20150831144110.4a7afa27@miho> <55ED3D9A.7070607@6wind.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836A83CBA@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <55ED5A6A.1000803@6wind.com> <55ED69BA.4010803@netinsight.net>
 <20150907134324.2d418bd4@miho> <20150907145009.43cb1634@miho>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D485927
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:11:55 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20150907145009.43cb1634@miho>
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>

Hi Simon,

On 09/07/2015 02:50 PM, Simon Kagstrom wrote:
> Chaining/segmenting mbufs can be useful in many places, so make it
> global.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Faltstrom <johan.faltstrom@netinsight.net>
> 
> [...]
> 
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -1775,6 +1775,40 @@ static inline int rte_pktmbuf_is_contiguous(const struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  }
>  
>  /**
> + * Chain an mbuf to another, thereby creating a segmented packet.
> + *
> + * Note: The implementation will do a linear walk over the segments to find
> + * the tail entry. For cases when there are many segments, it's better to
> + * chain the entries manually.
> + *
> + * @param head the head of the mbuf chain (the first packet)
> + * @param tail the mbuf to put last in the chain
> + *
> + * @return 0 on success, -EOVERFLOW if the chain is full (256 entries)
> + */

Small nit about the API comment, it should be:

@param head
  The head of the mbuf chain (the first packet).
...

(note the uppercase and the dot at the end, see the other functions
in the file)

I know Thomas usually fixes this kind of stuff when he pushes
the patches, but it's better if we can avoid him this load :)


Regards,
Olivier