2015-02-03 07:26, David Marchand:
> Two little comments.
>
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com>
> wrote:
> > @@ -578,37 +579,36 @@ eal_check_common_options(struct internal_config
> > *internal_cfg)
> > void
> > eal_common_usage(void)
> > {
> > - printf("-c COREMASK -n NUM [-m NB] [-r NUM] [-b
> > <domain:bus:devid.func>]"
> > - "[--proc-type primary|secondary|auto]\n\n"
> > + printf("-c COREMASK|-l CORELIST -n CHANNELS [options]\n\n"
> > "EAL common options:\n"
> > - " -c COREMASK : A hexadecimal bitmask of cores to run on\n"
> > - " -l CORELIST : List of cores to run on\n"
> > - " The argument format is
> > <c1>[-c2][,c3[-c4],...]\n"
> [snip]
> > + " -n NUM Number of memory channels\n"
>
> Not really a problem, but for consistency : here, you are talking about
> NUM, while at first, you wrote -n CHANNELS.
Yes you're right. I changed headline but not the description of this option.
Will do.
> [snip]
> > /* first long only option value must be >= 256, so that we won't
> > * conflict with short options */
> > OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM = 256,
> > -#define OPT_HUGE_DIR "huge-dir"
> > - OPT_HUGE_DIR_NUM = OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM,
> > -#define OPT_MASTER_LCORE "master-lcore"
> > +#define OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR "base-virtaddr"
> > + OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR_NUM,
>
> Why skip the first entry ?
> Afaik, OPT_BASE_VIRTADDR_NUM will be set to 257, is it to avoid having this
> = OPT_LONG_MIN_NUM moved anytime we add a new long option at the top of the
> enum ?
Exactly, yes. I think we don't care what is the first number.
It doesn't deserve a painful assignment.
> The rest looks good to me.
> Acked-by: David Marchand <david.marchand at 6wind.com>
Thanks
--
Thomas
