Maxim,
Does this impact interworking with other packages like SNORT etc in your
experience ?
Is it likely that someone will need to convert to generic headers, do you
have a use case that this might be an issue?
I think we need to scope the defines, but would like to be sure we are not
making a l
I do like having the _s as it is more readable IMO. What happens when you have
a self reference in another structure.
#1
typedef struct odp__t {
struct odp__t * name;
} odp__t;
OR #2
typedef struct odp__s {
struct odp__s * name;
} odp__t;
OR #3
typedef struct odp_ {
Bill Mill's point about debuggers would seem to tip the argument back to
option 1, which is what we have for the most part.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Mike Holmes
wrote:
> The common set is option 1, which is what we have in may places, I dont
> like that we make it possible to referenc
The common set is option 1, which is what we have in may places, I dont
like that we make it possible to reference the struct without the typedef,
but unless we have further dissent we have a winner.I think.
Mike
On 29 August 2014 13:28, William Mills wrote:
> OK, Yes I never say anything on
OK, Yes I never say anything on this list but ...
On 08/29/2014 01:19 PM, Mike Holmes wrote:
Ok, I need a better feel for consensus here or it will flip flop :), as
this impacts all structs we really need a final answer
typedef struct odp__t {...} odp__t;
OR
typedef struct odp__s {...} odp__t;
I'm happy with either 1 or 3. And yes, the purpose of the struct tag is to
permit self-reference. Since it's not intended to be used by anyone except
the typedef itself it can be at the implementer's discretion. If you have
a self-referencing struct then use it, otherwise you can either omit it
Ok, I need a better feel for consensus here or it will flip flop :), as
this impacts all structs we really need a final answer
typedef struct odp__t {...} odp__t;
OR
typedef struct odp__s {...} odp__t;
OR
typedef struct {...} odp__t;
I prefer the latter, why even name it unless you need to refere
We've been using odp__t for typedef stuff, taking advantage that of
the fact that struct tags occupy a different namespace. So
typedef struct odp__t {...} odp__t;
is perfectly valid and unambiguous C and avoids additional namespace
clutter.
odp__e has been suggested for ODP enums.
Bill
On Fr
On 29 August 2014 03:59, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nsn.com> wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> > boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Mike Holmes
> > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 9:26 PM
> > T
Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes
---
configure.ac | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index c9aac14..da109b7 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ AC_OUTPUT
AC_MSG_RESULT([
$PACKAGE $VERSION
On Aug 29, 2014, at 2:59 AM, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo)
wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
>> boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Mike Holmes
>> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 9:26 PM
>> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.
On 2014-08-28 06:56, Robbie King wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Robbie King
> ---
> .gitignore|2 +
> configure.ac |1 +
> example/Makefile.am |2 +-
> example/ipsec/Makefile.am | 12 +
> example/ipsec/README |
Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes
Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell
---
v2:
Add dependencies
Add cross compile
Add comments on test cases
.gitignore | 1 +
DEPENDENCIES| 19 +++-
configure.ac| 20
test/Makefile.am| 2 +-
test/api_t
I think this discussion is really good, it highlights that we don't have a
list of what is missing and what people know needs to be done "todo".
*If a feature has never existed it needs to be a new work card.*
*If the code exists and it fails to work fully or is not well documented I
think it is a
Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell
Acked-by: Petri Savolainen
Reviewed-by: Stuart Haslam
---
.gitignore | 6 +-
configure.ac | 4 +-
doc/doxygen.cfg| 2 +-
example/Makefile.inc
Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell
Reviewed-by:Mike Holmes
Acked-by: Petri Savolainen
---
example/generator/odp_generator.c | 6 +--
helper/include/odph_chksum.h | 2 +-
helper/include/odph_eth.h | 2 +-
helper/include/odph_icmp.h| 79 +++
h
Hi,
After todays call we said that we wanted to move include/helper/odp_* into
helper/
directory done.
Added then into helper/include if we want to move generic c files there as
well...
v2. Fixed Stuart's comment about renaming odph_packet_helper.h -> odph_packet.h
Stuart and I agreed that we
Still book keeping should be done in a single place. It’s confusing if
TODO/missing feature lists are spread over doxygen comments, bugzilla bug
reports, cards, … I’d use doxygen only for documenting the existing code, and
keep list missing features somewhere else.
E.g. in this case, when som
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:02:08PM +0100, Anders Roxell wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell
> ---
> .gitignore | 6 +-
> configure.ac | 4 +-
> doc/doxygen.cfg| 2 +-
> exampl
I agree with Petri. Since C has a single global namespace for #defines the
real issue is name collisions with applications using ODP.
Bill
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nsn.com> wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: lng-odp-
On 08/29/2014 02:53 PM, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) wrote:
Hi,
ODP/ODPH prefixes are needed always. First to make it clear what comes ODP/ODP
helper, and secondly to avoid name space collisions (e.g. with
linux/posix/application files that define similar things).
-Petri
So that if som
We definitely need the closure APIs to be part of v1.0 for completeness.
For now noting their absence as bugs is a good way of reminding us of that
fact.
Bill
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 6:34 AM, Mike Holmes wrote:
>
>
>
> On 29 August 2014 04:05, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
> petri.savo
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Anders Roxell
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 1:02 AM
> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: [lng-odp] [PATCH 2/2] odph_icmp: add ODPH_ prefix
>
> Signed-off-by:
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Anders Roxell
> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2014 1:02 AM
> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: [lng-odp] [PATCH 1/2] move helper functions and rename to prefix
> to
On 29 August 2014 04:05, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nsn.com> wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> > boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Mike Holmes
> > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:54 PM
> >
On 29 August 2014 06:53, Savolainen, Petri (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nsn.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ODP/ODPH prefixes are needed always. First to make it clear what comes
> ODP/ODP helper, and secondly to avoid name space collisions (e.g. with
> linux/posix/application files that define simil
Hi,
ODP/ODPH prefixes are needed always. First to make it clear what comes ODP/ODP
helper, and secondly to avoid name space collisions (e.g. with
linux/posix/application files that define similar things).
-Petri
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng
On 08/29/2014 12:53 AM, Mike Holmes wrote:
Signed-off-by: Mike Holmes
---
platform/linux-generic/include/api/odp_shared_memory.h | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/include/api/odp_shared_memory.h
b/platform/linux-generic/include/api
I think we do not need to rename defines. For example
#define ICMP_ECHOREPLY 0 /**< Echo Reply */
is always ICMP_ECHOREPLY and is always 0. I suppose that defines were
copied from
some header file. And my opinion that we should have them as is, not
implemen
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Mike Holmes
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 11:54 PM
> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: [lng-odp] [PATCH] odp_shared_memory.h: Document odp_shm_reserve
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org [mailto:lng-odp-
> boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of ext Mike Holmes
> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 9:26 PM
> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: [lng-odp] [PATCH v4] Add-global_init-paramiters
>
> Signed-off-by: M
31 matches
Mail list logo
