Le 02/04/2019 à 19:46, Ferruh Yigit a écrit :
+* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``read_clock``.
This means for a PMD to claim 'timestamp' support, it should implement the
'read_clock' dev_ops, is it really the case?
Should we say 'related' instead of 'implements' ?
Ok for me. I guess this will depend on how another device vendor would
implement the feature.
+ return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->read_clock)(dev,
+ timestamp)); >
Please fix the syntax.
Just one more tab for the second line, right? Multiple functions just
before have the same spacing. When in Rome...
Can PMD return a fail?
MLX5's implementation may return any errno value, which are not defined
in the ibv API it is using. Not sure how I should address that in the
comment?
Thanks for the review! I directly addressed other comments in v3.
Tom
