From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the macros/inlines that were moved Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 16:47:11 -0200 Message-ID: <20071208184711.GF3180@ghostprotocols.net> References: <11971083882331-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <11971083881862-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <11971083881667-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <11971083883685-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <1197108388630-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <11971083883727-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dccp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Gerrit Renker Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:34971 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750863AbXLHSrQ (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Dec 2007 13:47:16 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <11971083883727-git-send-email-gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Em Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 10:06:25AM +0000, Gerrit Renker escreveu: > This moves the inlines (which were previously declared as macros) back into packet_history.h since > the loss detection code needs to be able to read entries from the RX history in order to create the > relevant loss entries: it needs at least tfrc_rx_hist_loss_prev() and tfrc_rx_hist_last_rcv(), which > in turn require the definition of the other inlines (macros). > > Additionally, inn one case the use of inlines instead of a macro broke the algorithm: rx_hist_swap() > (introduced in next patch) needs to be able to swap the history entries; when using an inline returning > a pointer instead, one gets compilation errors such as: > > distcc[24516] ERROR: compile /root/.ccache/packet_his.tmp.aspire.home.net.24512.i on _tiptop failed > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c: In function '__one_after_loss': > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:266: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:267: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c: In function '__two_after_loss': > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:298: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:299: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:336: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:337: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand > make[4]: *** [net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.o] Error 1 > make[3]: *** [net/dccp/ccids/lib] Error 2 > make[2]: *** [net/dccp/ccids] Error 2 > make[1]: *** [net/dccp/] Error 2 > make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 Because you do it this way: tfrc_rx_hist_swap(&TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 0), &TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 3)); I checked and at least in this patch series all uses are of this type, so why not do it using just the indexes, which would be simpler: tfrc_rx_hist_swap(h, 0, 3); With this implementation: static void tfrc_rx_hist_swap(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h, const int a, const int b) { const int idx_a = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, a), int idx_b = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, b); struct tfrc_rx_hist_entry *tmp = h->ring[idx_a]; h->ring[idx_a] = h->ring[idx_b]; h->ring[idx_b] = tmp; } - Arnaldo