From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8011CB0AA
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:53:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from nat-pool-rdu-t.redhat.com ([66.187.233.202] helo=localhost)
 by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63)
 (envelope-from <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>)
 id 1WaPLb-0008DA-Tb; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:53:55 -0400
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:53:42 -0400
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20140416125342.GA11887@localhost.localdomain>
References: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8970829D14A@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20140416104955.GA26829@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
 <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8970829D24B@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8970829D24B@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: -2.9 (--)
X-Spam-Status: No
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal_common_cpuflags: Fix %rbx corruption,
 and simplify the code
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 12:53:58 -0000

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:09:46AM +0000, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
> Hi Neil,
> 
> >Oh wow, yes, the if conditionals definately should be checked for each iteration of the for loop. Good eye.
> 
> >Still though, seems like a bug in gcc to check the state of the loop index on exit, when its never used to index the array at that value.  Seems a bit like this bug:
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45180
> 
> >Thomas I'll send a patch to fix this directly Neil
> 
> Actually, that index may be used in cause last "ret" value is 0:
> 
> if (!ret) {
>                         fprintf(stderr,
>                                 "ERROR: This system does not support \"%s\".\n"
>                                 "Please check that RTE_MACHINE is set correctly.\n",
>                                 cpu_feature_table[compile_time_flags[i]].name);
>                         exit(1);
>                 }
> 
Ah, well there you have it.  Thank you.  Either way though, those two error
checks need to be encased in brackets.  It appears I missed it in my previous
patch as the for loop only had one if, and so didn't need additional brackets,
and I extended the check, requiring brackets that I never added.  apologies.

I've sent a patch for review
Neil

> Thanks,
> 
> Pablo de Lara
> DPDK SW Engineer
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Intel Shannon Limited
> Registered in Ireland
> Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare Registered Number: 308263 Business address: Dromore House, East Park, Shannon, Co. Clare
> 
> 
> 
>  
>