From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] virtio: conditional compilation
	cleanup
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 14:37:55 +0530
Message-ID: <20160704090754.GD12596@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1467028448-8914-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1467371814-26754-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1467371814-26754-2-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20160704073648.GV2831@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <20160704083626.GA12596@localhost.localdomain>
 <20160704084232.GY2831@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 <jianbo.liu@linaro.org>, <huawei.xie@intel.com>
To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM01-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-bn3nam01on0055.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.33.55])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51B952A5D
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 Jul 2016 11:08:15 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160704084232.GY2831@yliu-dev.sh.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 Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:42:32PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:06:27PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 03:36:48PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:46:36PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > @@ -494,9 +486,6 @@ virtio_dev_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > >  {
> > > >  	uint8_t vtpci_queue_idx = 2 * queue_idx + VTNET_SQ_TQ_QUEUE_IDX;
> > > >  
> > > > -#ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
> > > > -	struct virtio_hw *hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> > > > -#endif
> > > >  	struct virtnet_tx *txvq;
> > > >  	struct virtqueue *vq;
> > > >  	uint16_t tx_free_thresh;
> > > > @@ -511,13 +500,14 @@ virtio_dev_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > >  	}
> > > >  
> > > >  #ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
> > > > +	struct virtio_hw *hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> > > 
> > > I'd suggest to move above declaration to ...
> > > 
> > > >  	/* Use simple rx/tx func if single segment and no offloads */
> > > >  	if ((tx_conf->txq_flags & VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS) == VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS &&
> > > >  	     !vtpci_with_feature(hw, VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF)) {
> > > 
> > > here: we should try to avoid declaring vars in the middle of a code block.
> > 
> > Next patch in this series, moving all rxtx handler selection code to
> > separate function(virtio_update_rxtx_handler()) where declaration comes
> > as first line in the function.i.e the comment is taken care of in the
> > series.
> 
> Yes, I saw that. But in principle, each patch is atomic: it's not a
> good idea/practice to introduce issues in path A and then fix it in
> path B.

In my view it was not an issue as I was removing all possible
conditional compilation flag. If I were to move the declaration to top
then another conditional compilation RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
flag I need to add around declaring the variable.

Hope this justifies the reason. If you are not convinced then let me know,
if will add the change in next revision.

Jerin

> 
> 	--yliu