On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Stephen Hemminger <
stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:50:41 -0700
> Ravi Kerur <rkerur at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Macros RTE_MBUF_DATA_DMA_ADDR and RTE_MBUF_DATA_DMA_ADDR_DEFAULT
> > are defined in each PMD driver file. Move those macros into common
> > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h file. All PMD drivers include rte_mbuf.h
> > file directly/indirectly hence no additionl header file inclusion
> > is necessary.
> >
> > Compiled for:
> > > x86_64-native-linuxapp-clang
> > > x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc
> > > i686-native-linuxapp-gcc
> > > x86_64-native-bsdapp-gcc
> > > x86_64-native-bsdapp-clang
> >
> > Tested on:
> > > x86_64 Ubuntu 14.04, testpmd and 'make test'
> > > FreeBSD 10.1, testpmd
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ravi Kerur <rkerur at gmail.com>
>
> I like the idea, should have been done long ago.
>
> My only gripe is that you should do this as inline functions
> rather than macros. Inline functions are type safe, macros are not.
>
Agreed. However, I see another variation of the macro, users are primarily
from "app" directory and lone user from drivers/net/xenvirt/virtqueue.h
#define RTE_MBUF_DATA_DMA_ADDR(mb) \
rte_pktmbuf_mtod(mb, uint64_t)
#define rte_pktmbuf_mtod(m, t) rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(m, t, 0)
#define rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(m, t, o) \
((t)((char *)(m)->buf_addr + (m)->data_off + (o)))
Let me know should I still go ahead and do inline variation for drivers or
use above macro?
