Hi, On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.w...@intel.com> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM > > To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; > > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; > > m...@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chili...@intel.com>; > > jblu...@infradead.org; nelio.laranje...@6wind.com; > > arybche...@solarflare.com; thomas.monja...@6wind.com; > > jerin.ja...@caviumnetworks.com > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb > > segments > > > > Hi Yuanhan, > > > > On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu > > <yuanhan....@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > Hi Olivier, > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: > > > > Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits. > > > > > > But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really > > > take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans? > > > > > > --yliu > > > > Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to > > make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type for > > a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could be a > > first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?). > > > > I'll do the change and send a rfc. > > Ping ;) Is this still in your plan? >
Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with reviews and comments. As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t. It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one step when everyone uses this new type. Olivier
