From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/5] eal: modify device event callback process func Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2018 18:30:15 +0800 Message-ID: References: <1534503091-31910-1-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com> <1534503091-31910-4-git-send-email-jia.guo@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: jblunck@infradead.org, shreyansh.jain@nxp.com, dev@dpdk.org, helin.zhang@intel.com To: "Burakov, Anatoly" , stephen@networkplumber.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, gaetan.rivet@6wind.com, jingjing.wu@intel.com, thomas@monjalon.net, motih@mellanox.com, matan@mellanox.com, harry.van.haaren@intel.com, qi.z.zhang@intel.com, shaopeng.he@intel.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81862BA8 for ; Sun, 30 Sep 2018 12:30:23 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 9/26/2018 8:20 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 17-Aug-18 11:51 AM, Jeff Guo wrote: >> This patch modify the device event callback process function name to be >> more explicit, and exposure the API from private to public. The drivers >> and apps would directly use this API to process device event callback. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeff Guo >> --- > > > >> -typedef void (*rte_dev_event_cb_fn)(char *device_name, >> +typedef void (*rte_dev_event_cb_fn)(const char *device_name, >>                       enum rte_dev_event_type event, >>                       void *cb_arg); >>   @@ -439,6 +439,23 @@ rte_dev_event_callback_unregister(const char >> *device_name, >>    * @warning >>    * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice >>    * >> + * Internal Executes all the user application registered callbacks for > > it probably should say @internal instead of "Internal", with comment > starting on a new line. > yes, you are here, and what i want is make it internal.