Hi, No more comments before v4. There are quite many small/easy things to fix already for v4.
Include update to this piece of text ... "Current version of interface allow Compression ONLY,and both Compression + hash ONLY sessions." ... You could describe the operation modes with a bit more context: when / how to use compression + hash vs. the normal just compress/decompress. No need to speculate on current version vs. future version. About operation() vs compress() + decompress(). There's no need to minimize the number of function prototypes in the spec. Usually, it's easier to understand code which uses compress() and decompress() vs operation(x). Also specification is easier to write and maintain when you can refer to actual function calls vs function call + mode. Implementation may have more optimization opportunities with separate functions (e.g. if your HW implements only decompress, and compress needs to be pure SW etc.). -Petri > -----Original Message----- > From: shally verma [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 8:27 AM > To: Verma, Shally <[email protected]> > Cc: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; Challa, Mahipal <[email protected]>; > Narayana, Prasad Athreya <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [RFC, API-NEXT v3 1/1] comp: compression interface > > Do we have any more comments on same? > > Petri > > Could you get time to review feedback? > > Can we consider v3 as accepted? > > Thanks > Shally >
