[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] virtio: conditional compilation cleanup

[Jerin Jacob]

On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 07:02:25PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:37:55PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 04:42:32PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 02:06:27PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 03:36:48PM +0800, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:46:36PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > > > @@ -494,9 +486,6 @@ virtio_dev_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > >  {
> > > > > >  	uint8_t vtpci_queue_idx = 2 * queue_idx + VTNET_SQ_TQ_QUEUE_IDX;
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > -#ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
> > > > > > -	struct virtio_hw *hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> > > > > > -#endif
> > > > > >  	struct virtnet_tx *txvq;
> > > > > >  	struct virtqueue *vq;
> > > > > >  	uint16_t tx_free_thresh;
> > > > > > @@ -511,13 +500,14 @@ virtio_dev_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > >  
> > > > > >  #ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
> > > > > > +	struct virtio_hw *hw = dev->data->dev_private;
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'd suggest to move above declaration to ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > >  	/* Use simple rx/tx func if single segment and no offloads */
> > > > > >  	if ((tx_conf->txq_flags & VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS) == VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS &&
> > > > > >  	     !vtpci_with_feature(hw, VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF)) {
> > > > > 
> > > > > here: we should try to avoid declaring vars in the middle of a code block.
> > > > 
> > > > Next patch in this series, moving all rxtx handler selection code to
> > > > separate function(virtio_update_rxtx_handler()) where declaration comes
> > > > as first line in the function.i.e the comment is taken care of in the
> > > > series.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I saw that. But in principle, each patch is atomic: it's not a
> > > good idea/practice to introduce issues in path A and then fix it in
> > > path B.
> > 
> > In my view it was not an issue as I was removing all possible
> > conditional compilation flag. If I were to move the declaration to top
> > then another conditional compilation RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
> > flag I need to add around declaring the variable.
> 
> Nope, I was suggesting to move it inside the "if" block. So, this
> is actually consistent with what you are trying to do. Besides, it
> removes an declaration in the middle.

Just to get the clarity on "moving inside the 'if' block"

Are you suggesting to have like below?

 #ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
+       struct virtio_hw *hw;
        /* Use simple rx/tx func if single segment and no offloads */
        if ((tx_conf->txq_flags & VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS) ==
VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS &&
             !vtpci_with_feature(hw, VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF)) {
                PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO, "Using simple rx/tx path");
                dev->tx_pkt_burst = virtio_xmit_pkts_simple;
                dev->rx_pkt_burst = virtio_recv_pkts_vec;
-               use_simple_rxtx = 1;
+		hw = dev->data->dev_private;
+               hw->use_simple_rxtx = 1;
        }
 #endif


Instead of following scheme in existing patch,

 #ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
+       struct virtio_hw *hw = dev->data->dev_private;
        /* Use simple rx/tx func if single segment and no offloads */
        if ((tx_conf->txq_flags & VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS) ==
VIRTIO_SIMPLE_FLAGS &&
             !vtpci_with_feature(hw, VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF)) {
                PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO, "Using simple rx/tx path");
                dev->tx_pkt_burst = virtio_xmit_pkts_simple;
                dev->rx_pkt_burst = virtio_recv_pkts_vec;
-               use_simple_rxtx = 1;
+               hw->use_simple_rxtx = 1;
        }
 #endif


The former case will have issue as "hw" been used in "if" with vtpci_with_feature.

OR

if you meant just floating "struct virtio_hw *hw" without RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSSE3
then it comes error on non x86 as unused "hw" variable.

If you meant something else then let me know?

> 
> 	--yliu
> 
> > Hope this justifies the reason. If you are not convinced then let me know,
> > if will add the change in next revision.
> > 
> > Jerin
> > 
> > > 
> > > 	--yliu