From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] i40e: extract non-x86 specific code from
 vector driver
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:00:03 +0800
Message-ID: <CAP4Qi3_a2dNfZ=0kTfk-+4MQjJ-rffmp3hq_LRh3vVMXH=H6qw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1472032425-16136-1-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
 <1472032425-16136-2-git-send-email-jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
 <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115065A1BD@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: "Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>, "Wu,
 Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
 "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-lf0-f45.google.com (mail-lf0-f45.google.com
 [209.85.215.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DB9B3238
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 05:00:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-lf0-f45.google.com with SMTP id b81so109340097lfe.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:00:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115065A1BD@SHSMSX103.ccr.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>

On 12 October 2016 at 10:55, Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Jianbo
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jianbo Liu
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 5:54 PM
>> To: Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] i40e: extract non-x86 specific code from vector
>> driver
>>
>> move scalar code which does not use x86 intrinsic functions to new file
>> "i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h", while keeping x86 code in i40e_rxtx_vec.c.
>> This allows the scalar code to to be shared among vector drivers for different
>> platforms.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>
>> ---
...
>
> Should we rename the function "_40e_rx_queue_release_mbufs_vec" to
> "i40e_rx_queue_release_mbufs_vec_default", so functions be wrapped can follow a consistent rule?

I think these two ways are different.
For func/_func, _func implements what func needs to do, they are same.
We needs _func inline, to be called in different ARCHs.
But for func/func_default, func_default is the default behavior, but
you can use or not-use it in func.