From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Shreyansh Jain Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers: prefix driver REGISTER macro with RTE PMD Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:41:01 +0530 Message-ID: References: <1475949668-26829-1-git-send-email-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <184506162.Hjg7Xy8FWv@xps13> <4525292.xovB97rfbE@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "david.marchand@6wind.com" , , "nhorman@tuxdriver.com" To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: Received: from NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2nam02on0066.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.38.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C598B5597 for ; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 07:10:11 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <4525292.xovB97rfbE@xps13> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Monday 10 October 2016 01:20 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2016-10-09 15:12, Shreyansh Jain: >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] >>> 2016-10-08 23:35, Shreyansh Jain: >>>> +PMDINFO_TO_O = if grep -E 'RTE_PMD_REGISTER_PCI\([0-9a-zA-Z,_\. >>> ]+\)|RTE_PMD_REGISTER_VDEV\([0-9a-zA-Z,_\. ]+\)' $<;\ >>>> + then \ >>> >>> I don't understand why you don't simply grep 'RTE_PMD_REGISTER_.*(' ? >> >> Because I want to make sure that the grep matches only the DRIVER registration functions. >> In case a new macro (or driver type) is added in future, this macro can be updated. This way we can reduce the probability of a faulty match. >> >> Is there a problem with closest possible match? > > It is just long and useless. A macro starting with RTE_PMD_REGISTER_ must > be called from a PMD. What else? Long, yes. But I don't know why you state it as useless. Reducing probability of a false positive is what it does. Anyways, I will send a v3 with "grep -Eq 'DRIVER_REGISTER_.*\(.*\)'". - Shreyansh