15/12/2021 14:06, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:step...@networkplumber.org] > > > Sent: Wednesday, 15 December 2021 04.21 > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 01:06:14 +0000 > > > "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.anan...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > --- a/lib/net/rte_ip.h > > > > > > +++ b/lib/net/rte_ip.h > > > > > > @@ -444,6 +444,26 @@ __rte_experimental > > > > > > int32_t > > > > > > rte_ip_parse_addr(const char *src_ip, uint32_t *output_addr); > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > +/** > > > > > > + * Print IP address from 32 bit int into char * buffer. > > > > > > + * > > > > > > + * @param ip_addr > > > > > > + * ip address to be printed. > > > > > > + * @param buffer > > > > > > + * The buffer the string will be saved into. > > > > > > + * @param buffer_size > > > > > > + * size of buffer to be used. > > > > > > + * > > > > > > + * @retval 0 > > > > > > + * Success. > > > > > > + * @retval -1 > > > > > > + * Failure due to invalid input arguments. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > +__rte_experimental > > > > > > +int32_t > > > > > > +rte_ip_print_addr(uint32_t ip_addr, char *buffer, uint32_t > > > > > > buffer_size); > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > In continuation of my email reply about the IPv4 parse function... > > > > > > > > > > I have a few suggestions to the IPv4 print function too: > > > > > > > > > > The return value should be the number of characters written to the > > > output string, and still -1 on error. With this modification, you could > > > > > use the return type ssize_t instead of int32_t. > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I would prefer having the parameters in the same order > > > as snprintf(): char *str, size_t size, const uint32_t ip_addr. Please > > > > > also notice the suggested changed type for the size, and the const > > > added to the ip_addr. > > > > > > > > > Honestly, I don't understand why we need to introduce such functions > > > > inside DPDK at all. > > > > What's wrong with existing standard ones: inet_ntop() and > > > inet_pton()? > > > > > > Agreed, I see no added value in reinventing here > > > > I think that DPDK functions for converting all sorts of types to/from > > strings would be useful; not only IP addresses, but also MAC addresses, > > TCP/UDP port numbers and VLAN IDs. > > For MACs we already have: > rte_ether_format_addr()/rte_ether_unformat_addr() > > > > > If you don't like IP address string conversion functions in the net > > library, DPDK could have a string conversions library. That library could > > expose a multitude of APIs for the same purpose, so the application can use > > the API that best fits each application use. > > I don’t mind to add new functions into net lib, if they are useful ones. > But for that particular case, I just don't see what is the reason to > develop and maintain our own functions while existing analogues: > - are well known, widely adopted and field proven > - do provide the same or even more comprehensive functionality
+1 Waiting for an answer from the authors. One month silence so far.
