From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] eal: pci: vfio: add rd/wr func for
 pci bar space
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:39:43 -0800
Message-ID: <20160107103943.5c630221@xeon-e3>
References: <1452184390-5994-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com>
 <1452184390-5994-7-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com>
 <20160107101925.293062ad@xeon-e3>
 <ADE62FE3-0B89-4738-A1E1-ED8AA8AD244E@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com (mail-pa0-f45.google.com
 [209.85.220.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FBA2C12E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  7 Jan 2016 19:39:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id uo6so246609971pac.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 10:39:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <ADE62FE3-0B89-4738-A1E1-ED8AA8AD244E@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 18:26:30 +0000
"Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:

> On 1/7/16, 12:19 PM, "dev on behalf of Stephen Hemminger" <dev-bounces@dp=
dk.org on behalf of stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>=20
> >On Thu,  7 Jan 2016 22:03:03 +0530
> >Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> wrote:
> >
> >> =20
> >> +int rte_eal_pci_read_bar(const struct rte_pci_device *device __rte_un=
used,
> >> +			 void *buf __rte_unused,
> >> +			 size_t len __rte_unused,
> >> +			 off_t offset __rte_unused,
> >> +			 int bar_idx __rte_unused)
> >> +{
> >> +#ifdef VFIO_PRESENT
> >> +	const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle =3D &device->intr_handle;
> >> +	return pci_vfio_read_bar(intr_handle, buf, len, offset, bar_idx);
> >> +#else
> >> +	return 0; /* UIO's not applicable */
> >> +#endif
> >> +}
> >
> >It seems wrong to declare all the parameters as unused but then use them.
> >Maybe there is a way to have a macro for USED(x) in the #else case
>=20
> I would suggest we create a macro '#define RTE_UNUSED(x)  ((void)x)=E2=80=
=99, unless we have one and I missed it groping though the code.
> >
>=20
>=20
> Regards,
> Keith
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20

Or just move the #ifdef outside the function and have two versions

#ifdef VFIO_PRESENT
int rte_eal_pci_read_bar(const struct rte_pci_device *device,
			 void *buf, size_t len,
			  off_t offset, int bar_idx)
{
	const struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle =3D &device->intr_handle;

	return pci_vfio_read_bar(intr_handle, buf, len, offset, bar_idx);
}
}
#else
int rte_eal_pci_read_bar(const struct rte_pci_device *device __rte_unused,
			 void *buf __rte_unused,
			 size_t len __rte_unused,
			 off_t offset __rte_unused,
			 int bar_idx __rte_unused)
{
	return 0; /* UIO's not applicable */
}
#endif