From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrzej Ostruszka Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] app/test-eventdev: add Tx adapter support Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:30:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20180904141223.24216-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com> <20180919222235.6239-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com> <20180919222235.6239-3-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com> <20180923113508.GA13456@jerin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from mail-lj1-f196.google.com (mail-lj1-f196.google.com [209.85.208.196]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C914C8B for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 10:30:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id p10-v6so17428417ljg.2 for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 01:30:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.0.72] (31-172-191-173.noc.fibertech.net.pl. [31.172.191.173]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p62-v6sm6392661ljb.19.2018.09.24.01.30.31 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Sep 2018 01:30:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180923113508.GA13456@jerin> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 23.09.2018 13:35, Jerin Jacob wrote: > -----Original Message----- >> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 03:52:34 +0530 >> From: Pavan Nikhilesh [...] >> - struct rte_event_dev_info info; >> - struct test_pipeline *t = evt_test_priv(test); >> - uint8_t tx_evqueue_id = 0; >> + uint8_t tx_evqueue_id[RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS] = {0}; > > Some old compiler throws error with this scheme. Please change to memset. Really? Could you give an example? That is perfectly legal C (since "forever"?) and I find it more readable than memset. Don't treat it as a request to keep the original version - if I were Pavan I would object this particular request since I prefer direct initialization, however here I'm more interested in learning more about your statement about compilers not supporting zero initialization of array members after the last initializer. And maybe also about to what extent we should be supporting old/non compliant compilers (the doc suggest to use gcc 4.9+). Best regards Andrzej