2021-05-20 15:24 (UTC+0100), Ferruh Yigit:
> On 3/3/2021 10:51 PM, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote:
[...]
> >
> > It is not mandatory to rename `d_addr`, this is for consistency only.
> > Naming in `rte_ether_hdr` will also resemble `rte_ipv4/6_hdr`.
> >
> > Workaround is to define `struct rte_ether_hdr` in such a away that
> > it can be used with or without `s_addr` macro (as defined on Windows)
> > This can be done for Windows only or for all platforms to save space.
> >
> > #pragma push_macro("s_addr")
> > #ifdef s_addr
> > #undef s_addr
> > #endif
> >
> > struct rte_ether_hdr {
> > struct rte_ether_addr d_addr; /**< Destination address. */
> > RTE_STD_C11
> > union {
> > struct rte_ether_addr s_addr; /**< Source address. */
> > struct {
> > struct rte_ether_addr S_un;
> > /**< MUST NOT be used directly, only via s_addr */
> > } S_addr;
> > /*< MUST NOT be used directly, only via s_addr */
> > };
> > uint16_t ether_type; /**< Frame type. */
> > } __rte_aligned(2);
> >
> > #pragma pop_macro("s_addr")
> >
>
> What is the problem with the workaround, why we can't live with it?
>
> It requires an order in include files, right?
There's no problem except a tricky structure definition with fields that
violate DPDK coding rules. It works with any include order.
Will fix typos in v3, thanks.
