[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v16 03/11] eal: change API of power intrinsics

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> 
> On 13-Jan-21 6:01 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> >> On 13-Jan-21 1:01 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Instead of passing around pointers and integers, collect everything
> >>>> into struct. This makes API design around these intrinsics much easier.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
> >>>> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> Notes:
> >>>>       v16:
> >>>>       - Add error handling
> >>>
> >>> There are few trivial checkpatch warnings, please check
> >>>
> >>
> >> To paraphrase Nick Fury, I recognize that checkpatch has produced
> >> warnings, but given that i don't agree with what checkpatch has to say
> >> in this case, I've elected to ignore it :)
> >>
> >> In particular, these warnings related to comments around struct members,
> >> which i think i've made to look nice and also took care of correct
> >> indentation in terms of code looking the same way with different tab
> >> widths. So, i don't think it should be changed, unless you're suggesting
> >> to re-layout comments on top of each member, rather than at the side
> >> (which i think is more readable).
> >
> > If top is not an option, it is possible to move comment on next after actual field lines:
> > uint32_t x;
> > /**<
> >   * blah, blah
> >   * blah, blah, blah
> >   */
> > AFAIK that would keep checkpatch happy.
> >
> 
> It's not as much "not an option" as it would look less readable to me
> than what there currently is. If we're going to keep comments not on the
> side, then on the top they go. I'd prefer to keep it as is, but if you
> feel strongly about it, i can change it.

I don't have any preferences about comments placement.
I just thought it would be good to keep checkpatch happy.
Specially if the changes in question are just cosmetic ones.