On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 05:26:10PM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 5:20 PM Tyler Retzlaff > <roret...@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 05:14:55PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 06/10/2022 17:10, Tyler Retzlaff: > > > > 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? > > > > > > That's just history. > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > Some file names are not correct, we could rename them. > > > > > > I think David is already doing the last minor changes on this series > > > while merging, so no need to do anything on your side. > > > > > > > Thomas, David with this just a final confirmation no need for a v6? > > you're tweaking the series as is for final comments? > > No need for a v6, the code move is trivial, and for the rest, I'm finished. > I'll restart the per patch build all over again to be sure, and then > merge the series probably tonight (CET+2).
acknowledged. thanks very much! > > > -- > David Marchand
