> On Oct 5, 2018, at 9:11 AM, Wiles, Keith <keith.wi...@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Oct 3, 2018, at 11:09 AM, Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 8/3/2018 3:05 PM, keith.wiles at intel.com (Keith Wiles) wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h | 5 +++++
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
>>> b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
>>> index 069c13ec7..2c4535b1a 100644
>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_common.h
>>> @@ -68,6 +68,11 @@ typedef uint16_t unaligned_uint16_t;
>>> /******* Macro to mark functions and fields scheduled for removal *****/
>>> #define __rte_deprecated __attribute__((__deprecated__))
>>>
>>> +/**
>>> + * short definition to mark a function or variable to a weak reference.
>>> + */
>>> +#define __rte_weak __attribute__((__weak__))
>>
>> Looks good to me.
>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
>>
>> Since the change is all mechanical same change in further patches, what do
>> you
>> think merging this patchset into single patch?
>
> I do not have a problem merging this into one, just time to do it is my big
> problem. The only reason I split this up was to give each owner of the file
> to review them.
During a meeting I was able to combine the patches, please have look.
>
> Regards,
> Keith
>
Regards,
Keith
