On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 11:29:51 +0100 "Hunt, David" <david.hunt at intel.com> wrote:
> On 15/6/2016 11:14 AM, Jan Viktorin wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 08:47:02 +0100 > > David Hunt <david.hunt at intel.com> wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > >> + > >> +/** Array of registered ops structs. */ > >> +extern struct rte_mempool_ops_table rte_mempool_ops_table; > >> + > >> +/** > >> + * @internal Get the mempool ops struct from its index. > >> + * > >> + * @param ops_index > >> + * The index of the ops struct in the ops struct table. It must be a > >> valid > >> + * index: (0 <= idx < num_ops). > >> + * @return > >> + * The pointer to the ops struct in the table. > >> + */ > >> +static inline struct rte_mempool_ops * > >> +rte_mempool_ops_get(int ops_index) > > Shouldn't this function be called rte_mempool_get/find_ops instead? > > > > > > Jan, > > I think at this stage that it's probably OK as it is. :) Ok. I just remember some discussion about this. I didn't follow the thread during last days so I wanted to be sure that it's not forgotten. Jan > > Rgds, > Dave. > > > > -- Jan Viktorin E-mail: Viktorin at RehiveTech.com System Architect Web: www.RehiveTech.com RehiveTech Brno, Czech Republic