I'll leave the main review here to Pravin, but I did notice one thing.
There's a comment here that talks about how something changed. That's
useful enough to someone who knows how it was before, but it's a
little unfriendly to new readers. I prefer comments to talk about the
current state of affairs instead, unless the history is really
relevant. In this case it's only a really minor wording difference.
So I'd change this:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 09:20:04PM +0000, Mark Kavanagh wrote:
> +/* DPDK 1.8 makes significant changes to struct rte_ mbuf that impact OVS.
> + * Chief among these is the replacement of the 'data' pointer (previously
> used
> + * to store an ofpbuf's data) with an offset field - the data pointer may be
> + * calculated by adding the data_off to the mbuf segment address. This breaks
to something more like this:
In DPDK 1.8, struct rte_mbuf lacks a direct pointer to a packet's
data. Instead, it has a segment address and an offset field, whose
sum is the data pointer. This breaks...
which is only slightly different wording but IMO more friendly to
newcomers. If you did want to emphasize the history then you could
add a few more words at the beginning:
Unlike earlier versions, in DPDK 1.8, struct rte_mbuf lacks a
direct pointer to a packet's data. Instead, it has a segment
address and an offset field, whose sum is the data pointer. This
breaks...
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
