Hello Bruce, Thanks for reviewing my code.
I noticed errors generated by checkpatch. However all of them are due to original formatting of files. (e.g. code copy-pasted by me as-is from same file or modifications to original lines unrelated to formatting) I decided to preserve original formatting of files instead of introducing inconsistencies. I'll create V2 according to code guidelines if it is your preferred approach. Regards, Vlad > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 1:24 PM > To: Vladyslav Buslov > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] lpm: extend IPv6 next hop field > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 07:14:59PM +0200, Vladyslav Buslov wrote: > > This patch extend next_hop field from 8-bits to 21-bits in LPM library > > for IPv6. > > > > Added versioning symbols to functions and updated library and > > applications that have a dependency on LPM library. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vladyslav Buslov <vladyslav.bus...@harmonicinc.com> > > --- > Looks good to me. There are a number of checkpatch errors flagged. Can you > perhaps do a V2 with those fixed. (You can use the checkpatches.sh wrapper > script in the devtools directory to help). > > Once checkpatch errors are cleared: > > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > Regards, > /Bruce
