On 10/14/2022 10:40 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 10/14/2022 10:09 AM, Chaoyong He wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_ethdev.c
index e131021..d938e01 100644
--- a/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_ethdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/nfp/nfp_ethdev.c
@@ -33,7 +33,6 @@
#include "nfpcore/nfp_nsp.h"
#include "nfp_common.h"
-#include "nfp_ctrl.h"
#include "nfp_rxtx.h"
#include "nfp_logs.h"
#include "nfp_cpp_bridge.h"
@@ -138,6 +137,10 @@
update |= NFP_NET_CFG_UPDATE_GEN | NFP_NET_CFG_UPDATE_RING;
+ /* Enable vxlan */
+ new_ctrl |= NFP_NET_CFG_CTRL_VXLAN;
+ update |= NFP_NET_CFG_UPDATE_VXLAN;
+
if (hw->cap & NFP_NET_CFG_CTRL_RINGCFG)
new_ctrl |= NFP_NET_CFG_CTRL_RINGCFG;
Hi Chaoyong,
Thanks for the update.
Although practically you don't need to include 'nfp_ctrl.h' since it is
included by 'nfp_common.h',
'nfp_ethdev.c' uses symbols from 'nfp_ctrl.h'.
What do you think to explicitly include a header when source file uses
symbols from that header as a principal?
This helps to document what is required externally for source file
clearly, also protects against changes, like you may move 'nfp_ctrl.h'
include out of 'nfp_common.h' in the future.
According above, would you be OK to include 'nfp_ctrl.h' in
'nfp_common.h' (as already done), but not remove 'nfp_ctrl.h' from files
that use symbols from it?
also can you please use '--in-reply-to' for next version?
Following documentation has details:
https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/contributing/patches.html#sending-patches
