[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: clean up rte_eth_dev_info_get

[Lu, Wenzhuo]

Hi Tiwei,


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bie, Tiwei
> Sent: Monday, February 6, 2017 10:51 AM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: clean up rte_eth_dev_info_get
> 
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 10:41:28AM +0800, Lu, Wenzhuo wrote:
> > Hi Tiwei,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bie, Tiwei
> > > Sent: Monday, February 6, 2017 10:31 AM
> > > To: Lu, Wenzhuo
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: clean up
> > > rte_eth_dev_info_get
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 10:09:32AM +0800, Wenzhuo Lu wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > >  static void ixgbe_dcb_init(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, struct
> > > > ixgbe_dcb_config *dcb_config); -static int is_ixgbe_pmd(const char
> > > > *driver_name);
> > > > +static int is_device_supported(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct
> > > > +eth_driver *drv);
> > > >
> > >
> > > Should be:
> > > static bool is_device_supported(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct
> > > eth_driver *drv);
> > O, forget to change it. Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > >  /* For Virtual Function support */  static int
> > > > eth_ixgbevf_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev); @@
> > > > -4380,16 +4380,14 @@ static int
> > > ixgbevf_dev_xstats_get_names(__rte_unused struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > >  	ixgbe_add_rar(dev, addr, 0, 0);
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > > -static int
> > > > -is_ixgbe_pmd(const char *driver_name)
> > > > +static bool
> > > > +is_device_supported(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct eth_driver
> > > > +*drv)
> > > >  {
> > > > -	if (!strstr(driver_name, "ixgbe"))
> > > > -		return -ENOTSUP;
> > > > +	if (strcmp(dev->driver->pci_drv.driver.name,
> > > > +		   drv->pci_drv.driver.name))
> > > > +		return FALSE;
> > > >
> > >
> > > It would be better to use `false' instead of `FALSE'.
> > I see both 'false' and 'FALSE' are defined and used. Is there any reason that
> 'false' is better?
> >
> 
> I think `true' and `false' are standard keywords defined and reserved by C. So I
> think it would be better to use them if the return type is `bool'.
O, there's no 'bool' in C. You have to define it. The same for 'false' and 'true'.

> 
> Best regards,
> Tiwei Bie