On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 02:26:34PM +0000, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Anoob Joseph > > Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 7:47 PM > > To: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]>; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > > <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; Mattias Rönnblom <[email protected]>; > > Nikhil Rao <[email protected]>; Erik Gabriel Carrillo > > <[email protected]>; Abhinandan Gujjar > > <[email protected]>; > > Bruce Richardson <[email protected]>; Pablo de Lara > > <[email protected]>; Narayana Prasad Raju Athreya > > <[email protected]>; Lukas Bartosik <[email protected]>; Pavan > > Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <[email protected]>; Hemant Agrawal > > <[email protected]>; Nipun Gupta <[email protected]>; Harry van > > Haaren <[email protected]>; Liang Ma <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH 00/39] adding eventmode helper > > library > > > > Hi Thomas, Jerin, > > > > Is there any consensus on how we should proceed? Can this be taken up by > > techboard? > > For me it make sense to move these helper functions to examples/.. and make > it as standalone(not as library) > Suggested directory(In the order of my preference). No strong preference on > the directory name though > 1) examples/helper or > 2) examples/common or > 3) examples/utils > > Thomas? Bruce? > No strong opinions. In terms of naming, "common" seems to be the usual (dare I say common) name used in DPDK for shared code resources such as this.
For what exactly is being proposed, is there a short version of the suggested approach and the logic behind it?
