From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com,
sassmann@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 4/7] ixgbe: Add function for testing status bits in Rx descriptor
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 09:21:01 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F39467D.9070409@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1328987174.325.18.camel@deadeye>
On 02/11/2012 11:06 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 16:08 -0800, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>> From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
>>
>> This change adds a small function for testing Rx status bits in the
>> descriptor. The advantage to this is that we can avoid unnecessary
>> byte swaps on big endian systems.
> [...]
>> + /* unmap the sg list when FCPRSP is received */
>> + case __constant_cpu_to_le32(IXGBE_RXDADV_STAT_FCSTAT_FCPRSP):
> [...]
>
> cpu_to_le32() works as a compile-time constant when given a constant
> argument. You shouldn't need this ugly __constant_ prefix.
>
> Ben.
>
If that is the case then what is the point of even having the
__constant_ prefixed version of these macros anyway? I ask because I
know we have had people submit patches in the past replacing htons calls
with __constant_htons and the like and nobody has ever spoken up before
to indicate that these were unnecessary.
Why don't you submit patches to get rid of these calls from the kernel
all together and just replace references to them with their non-prefixed
counterparts? Then you wouldn't have to worry about changes like this
being submitted in the future.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-13 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-11 0:08 [net-next 0/7][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 1/7] ixgbe: Minor refactor of RSC Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 2/7] ixgbe: Address fact that RSC was not setting GSO size for incoming frames Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 3/7] ixgbe: Let the Rx buffer allocation clear status bits instead of cleanup Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 4/7] ixgbe: Add function for testing status bits in Rx descriptor Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 19:06 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-02-13 17:21 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2012-02-13 17:37 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 5/7] ixgbe: Drop the _ADV of descriptor macros since all ixgbe descriptors are ADV Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 6/7] ixgbe: Combine post-DMA processing of sk_buff fields into single function Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-11 0:08 ` [net-next 7/7] skbuff: Move rxhash and vlan_tci to consolidate holes in sk_buff Jeff Kirsher
2012-02-12 22:05 ` [net-next 0/7][pull request] Intel Wired LAN Driver Updates David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F39467D.9070409@intel.com \
--to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gospo@redhat.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sassmann@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).