Hey Bill, Ah, no problem. It is a minor thing. Thanks for your time, Andriy
On 28.02.2017 19:00, Bill Fischofer wrote:
Thanks Andriy, We discussed this during the call and the consensus is to leave this code as-is for now. Bala was on the call, so Cavium was represented in the discussions. Regards, Bill On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Andriy Berestovskyy <andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com>> wrote: Hey guys, IMO having: typedef enum odp_ipsec_op_mode_t ODP_IPSEC_OP_MODE_* typedef enum odp_ipsec_dir_t ODP_IPSEC_DIR_* typedef enum odp_ipsec_mode_t ODP_IPSEC_MODE_* typedef enum odp_ipsec_tunnel_type_t ODP_IPSEC_TUNNEL_* and then: typedef enum odp_ipsec_protocol_t ODP_IPSEC_* looks like a minor inconsistency to me. I am not sure I will be able to join the call since we have the OFP call about the same time... Regards, Andriy On 28.02.2017 13:43, Bill Fischofer wrote: On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com <mailto:petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com> <mailto:petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com <mailto:petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com>>> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org <mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org <mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org>>] On Behalf Of Bill > Fischofer > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 5:17 PM > To: Andriy Berestovskyy <andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com> <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com>>> > Cc: lng-odp-forward <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org <mailto:lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> <mailto:lng-odp@lists.linaro.org <mailto:lng-odp@lists.linaro.org>>> > Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH] api: ipsec: make IPSEC protocol consistent > with other types > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Andriy Berestovskyy < > andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com> <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com <mailto:andriy.berestovs...@cavium.com>>> wrote: > > > Oops, sorry. > > Shall I resend the patch then? > > > > Probably not necessary right now. Let's get some feedback on this. If a v2 > is needed, then yes, please post it as an API-NEXT patch. Thanks. +/** + * IPSEC protocol + */ +typedef enum odp_ipsec_proto_t { + /** ESP protocol */ + ODP_IPSEC_ESP = 0, + + /** AH protocol */ + ODP_IPSEC_AH + +} odp_ipsec_proto_t; " "proto" is not an obvious abbreviation. It might stand for "prototype". I'd prefer to see this as odp_ipsec_protocol_t " Bill, you didn't like "proto" the last time. Is it now OK? I prefer these things to be unambiguous to trying to save a couple of characters, but there are a number of proposed changes in this patch, so worth discussing them. -Petri