[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: extend rte_mbuf_prefetch_part* to support more prefetching methods
Olivier MATZ
olivier.matz at 6wind.com
Thu Jun 2 09:10:37 CEST 2016
Hi Jianbo,
On 06/01/2016 05:29 AM, Jianbo Liu wrote:
>> enum rte_mbuf_prefetch_type {
>> > PREFETCH0,
>> > PREFETCH1,
>> > ...
>> > };
>> >
>> > static inline void
>> > rte_mbuf_prefetch_part1(enum rte_mbuf_prefetch_type type,
>> > struct rte_mbuf *m)
>> > {
>> > switch (type) {
>> > case PREFETCH0:
>> > rte_prefetch0(&m->cacheline0);
>> > break;
>> > case PREFETCH1:
>> > rte_prefetch1(&m->cacheline0);
>> > break;
>> > ...
>> > }
>> >
> How about adding these to forbid the illegal use of this macro?
> enum rte_mbuf_prefetch_type {
> ENUM_prefetch0,
> ENUM_prefetch1,
> ...
> };
>
> #define RTE_MBUF_PREFETCH_PART1(type, m) \
> if (ENUM_##type == ENUM_prefretch0) \
> rte_prefetch0(&(m)->cacheline0); \
> else if (ENUM_##type == ENUM_prefetch1) \
> rte_prefetch1(&(m)->cacheline0); \
> ....
>
As Stephen stated, a static inline is better than a macro, mainly
because it is understood by the compiler instead of beeing a dumb
code replacement.
Any reason why you would prefer a macro in that case?
Regards
Olivier
More information about the dev
mailing list