From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB651094
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 16 Jan 2017 12:01:32 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29])
 by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2017 03:01:31 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,238,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="809406380"
Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.61])
 by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 16 Jan 2017 03:01:29 -0800
Received: by  (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:01:28 +0000
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:01:28 +0000
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, jianbo.liu@linaro.org,
 viktorin@rehivetech.com, santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com
Message-ID: <20170116110127.GA15056@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1482832175-27199-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1484212646-10338-1-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <1484212646-10338-12-git-send-email-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
 <2622450.7mMCSCBjjk@xps13>
 <20170116032640.GA6271@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170116032640.GA6271@localhost.localdomain>
Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?=
 =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 11/29] eal: generic implementation for I/O
 device read/write access
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:01:33 -0000

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 08:56:41AM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 10:29:42PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2017-01-12 14:47, Jerin Jacob:
> > > +#define rte_read8_relaxed(addr) \
> > > +	({ uint8_t __v = *(const volatile uint8_t *)addr; __v; })
> > 
> > Why do you prefer a macro over an inline function?
> 
> In this case, I thought of avoiding any compiler behavior changes when
> adding the new EAL APIs. Earlier, drivers were using direct pointer
> dereference in code, I thought of using the macro to just substitute that to avoid
> any performance regression due to this change for easy patchset acceptance.
> 
> IMO, One line macros are OK and for this specific case Linux also uses
> readl/writel as macros.
> 
> Having said that, If you think it needs to be changed to "static inline", I
> am fine with that. Let me know.
> 

My preference too is to go with static inline functions over macros
whenever possible.

/Bruce

> > It won't provide the same "debuggability".