26/04/2020 09:18, Joyce Kong: > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > 24/04/2020 05:21, Joyce Kong: > > > Bitwise operation APIs are defined and used in a lot of PMDs, which > > > caused a huge code duplication. To reduce duplication, this patch > > > consolidates them into a common API family. > > [...] > > > +rte_get_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile uint32_t *addr) > > > +rte_set_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile uint32_t *addr) > > > +rte_clear_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile uint32_t *addr) > > > +rte_test_and_set_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile uint32_t > > > +*addr) rte_test_and_clear_bit32_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile > > > +uint32_t *addr) rte_get_bit64_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile > > > +uint64_t *addr) rte_set_bit64_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile > > > +uint64_t *addr) rte_clear_bit64_relaxed(unsigned int nr, volatile > > > +uint64_t *addr) rte_test_and_set_bit64_relaxed(unsigned int nr, > > > +volatile uint64_t *addr) rte_test_and_clear_bit64_relaxed(unsigned > > > +int nr, volatile uint64_t *addr) > > > > Sorry, I have one more naming concern with this series. > > I prefer a common namespace for bit operations. > > Would you be OK to prefix all function names with rte_bit_relaxed_? > > > Hi Thomas, > Do you mean to rename the functions as 'rte_bit_relaxed_get_bit32'? > If the example is ok, I will modify as this in v10.
Yes, thank you.
