On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 3:49 PM Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 03:46:21PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 3:44 PM Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > > > > Sent: Friday, 6 October 2023 11.45 > > > > > > > > The event structure in DPDK is 16-bytes in size, and events are > > > > regularly passed as parameters directly rather than being passed as > > > > pointers. To help compiler optimize correctly, we can explicitly request > > > > 16-byte alignment for events, which means that we should be able > > > > to do aligned vector loads/stores (e.g. with SSE or Neon) when working > > > > with those events. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com> > > > > Acked-by: Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> > > > > Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > +_Static_assert(sizeof(struct rte_event) == 16, "Event structure size > > > > is not 16-bytes in size"); > > > > > > Thank you for adding this extra check. We should have more of these. > > > > Use existing RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON this on .c file instead of header file. > > > > Ok to move to a C file, but I think using static_asserts are better than > using the old macro tricks of negatively sized arrays.
No strong opinion on the API. I just told because compatibility discussions came in. Key is to move to .c file. > > > > > > > NB: _Static_assert is deprecated in C23 [1], so for forward > > > compatibility, you could use static_assert (which is available in > > > <assert.h>) instead. Nice to have; feel free to ignore this comment. > > > > > > [1]: https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/_Static_assert > > >
