From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/33] common/cpt: add common code for
 init routine
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 18:02:45 +0530
Message-ID: <7325a516-0f5b-1993-efd9-1a203346b137@nxp.com>
References: <1528476325-15585-1-git-send-email-anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1536033560-21541-6-git-send-email-ajoseph@caviumnetworks.com>
 <d5860f61-29d7-2138-08a0-d075b1c0b10c@nxp.com> <1686325.VlSG2WtMdx@xps>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
 Anoob Joseph <anoob.joseph@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Narayana Prasad <narayanaprasad.athreya@caviumnetworks.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 Ankur Dwivedi <ankur.dwivedi@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Murthy NSSR <nidadavolu.murthy@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Nithin Dabilpuram <nithin.dabilpuram@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Ragothaman Jayaraman <rjayaraman@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Srisivasubramanian S <ssrinivasan@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Tejasree Kondoj <kondoj.tejasree@caviumnetworks.com>,
 ferruh.yigit@intel.com, john.mcnamara@intel.com
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 Anoob Joseph <ajoseph@caviumnetworks.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-eopbgr20045.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.2.45])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E8A7CE2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2018 14:33:02 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <1686325.VlSG2WtMdx@xps>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>


Hi Thomas,

On 9/17/2018 5:16 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

> 17/09/2018 12:45, Akhil Goyal:
>> On 9/4/2018 9:28 AM, Anoob Joseph wrote:
>>> +struct pending_queue {
>>> +	uint16_t enq_tail;
>>> +	uint16_t deq_head;
>>> +	uint16_t soft_qlen;
>>> +		/**< Software expected queue length */
>>> +	uint16_t p_doorbell;
>>> +	struct rid *rid_queue;
>>> +		/**< Array of pending requests */
>>> +	uint64_t pending_count;
>>> +		/**< Pending requests count */
>>> +};
>> better to add comment for each element of structure.
>> Also remove extra tab for comments(here and any other place if any.)
> I don't understand this trend in the community about doing comments
> _after_ the item _and_ not on the same line.
> The default style should be commenting _before_.
> And if you feel it is better to have the comment on the same line,
> then you can comment _after_, but on the same line.
>
I think this should not matter, whether the comment should be before or after,

it should be consistent across the code. I can see that both are being used equally.

Shall we change the complete code beyond this driver as well?

I think whatever we choose, it should be atleast consistent within the file.

-Akhil

>