On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 03:36:12PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 05/10/2022 18:34, Tyler Retzlaff: > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 09:11:26AM -0700, Tyler Retzlaff wrote: > > > > Newly added code can go to eal_common_thread.c rather than introduce a > > > > new common/rte_thread.c file (or is there a rationale for this?). > > > > > > i will make this change in the next revision. if anyone does object i > > > hope they will do so quickly. > > > > looking at this more closely i'm going to back away from making the > > adjustment here. if Thomas and/or Dmitry could comment it would be > > appreciated. > > > > it appears that functions placed in eal_common_xxx files are consumed > > internally by the eal where rte_xxx files are functions that are exposed > > through public api. > > It is not so clear. > There is already eal_common_thread.c which implements the same kind of > functions, > so I think you should move your new functions here. > > > since these additions are public api it seems they should remain in > > rte_thread.c > > Let's not have 2 .c files for the same purpose in the same directory.
just as another point there seem to be several other rte_xxx.c files here can we clarify why they were not subject to the same requirement? as a follow on does it mean that the code in those files should also be moved to eal_common_xxx files? please let me know if the justification is not the same i'll move the functions to the eal_common file as requested. i just want to make sure it is being done for the consistent/correct reason. thanks.
