From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 06/27] eal: introduce device class abstraction Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 10:10:55 +0200 Message-ID: <1749487.M6D8NYWNUp@xps> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Gaetan Rivet Return-path: Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66306AAB5 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 10:11:01 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 05/07/2018 13:48, Gaetan Rivet: > +/** > + * @file > + * > + * DPDK device class interface. > + * > + * This file exposes API and interfaces of device classes. What is the difference between "API" and "interfaces"? I think you need to explain what is a device class. You can mention examples ethdev and cryptodev. > +#define RTE_REGISTER_CLASS(nm, cls) \ > +RTE_INIT_PRIO(classinitfn_ ##nm, CLASS); \ If you remove the ; you can avoid next line. See this patch which removes such useless line: https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/41228/ > +static void classinitfn_ ##nm(void) \ > +{\ > + (cls).name = RTE_STR(nm);\ Better to insert a space before \ > + rte_class_register(&cls); \ > +}