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



Reply via email to