From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05EEFA0547; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:36:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7820840040; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:36:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F01C54003C; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 23:36:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1061) id 40EFE20B6C50; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:36:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 40EFE20B6C50 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1624570604; bh=D/Hql1JqWiISWHkR9eUYVhRRDXNI+bMJev9vBYhAt84=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=e/AOo/WoGaqgBqkqWdP01WlEHlt0lHhlpO4grST5LHpBQS9Pp4g3Yi4rlDaMPwQis hD5udsCFifx0QoE81W2Tq7fXHWyr+zPXqaGOxH+NLNgoVovondmEaskm60vnGvbXQd rYmoJJ2DKovTRWwcM9Z+LSNvuNsHQV+v0svi0Exw= Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 14:36:44 -0700 From: Jie Zhou To: Dmitry Kozlyuk Cc: Tyler Retzlaff , dev@dpdk.org, xiaoyun.li@intel.com, roretzla@microsoft.com, talshn@nvidia.com, pallavi.kadam@intel.com, thomas@monjalon.net, bruce.richardson@intel.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20210624213644.GA11067@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> References: <1620236174-10676-1-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <1620241931-28435-1-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <1620241931-28435-10-git-send-email-jizh@linux.microsoft.com> <20210621023053.07b8a425@sovereign> <20210623212632.GD20289@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <20210624154524.GA22718@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> <20210624214404.282808cf@sovereign> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210624214404.282808cf@sovereign> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v13 09/10] app/testpmd: fix unused function warnings X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 09:44:04PM +0300, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote: > 2021-06-24 08:45 (UTC-0700), Tyler Retzlaff: > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 02:26:32PM -0700, Jie Zhou wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 02:30:53AM +0300, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote: > > > > - > > > > void > > > > fdir_set_flex_mask(portid_t port_id, struct rte_eth_fdir_flex_mask *cfg) > > > > { > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h > > > > index d61a055bdd..a40ee902e8 100644 > > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h > > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h > > > > @@ -917,9 +917,7 @@ int all_ports_stopped(void); > > > > int port_is_stopped(portid_t port_id); > > > > int port_is_started(portid_t port_id); > > > > void pmd_test_exit(void); > > > > -#if defined(RTE_NET_I40E) || defined(RTE_NET_IXGBE) > > > > void fdir_get_infos(portid_t port_id); > > > > -#endif > > > > void fdir_set_flex_mask(portid_t port_id, > > > > struct rte_eth_fdir_flex_mask *cfg); > > > > void fdir_set_flex_payload(portid_t port_id, > > > > > > Hi Dmitry, I agree that should avoid the #ifdef as much as possible. But in this case, I am not quite sure if I followed your comment correctly. Someone originally introduced these i40e and ixgbe related fdir functions (print_fdir_mask, print_fdir_flex_payload, print_fdir_flex_mask, print_fdir_flow_type, get_fdir_info, fdir_get_infos) into testpmd with adding the #if defined(RTE_NET_I40E) || defined(RTE_NET_IXGBE) for 4 out of 6 functions and left 2 of them outside the #ifdef which caused compilation "unused function" warning. What I did here is just move the starting point of #ifdef to also include those 2 missed functions (print_fdir_mask and print_fdir_flex_payload). IMO the original author would be in better place to reducing the unneccary #ifdef in a proper way. > > > > i think i have to agree with jie here. there are limits to how many > > defects we should have to correct which are unrelated change. if this is > > critical i think it would be best if the maintainer provide a patch > > cleaning up the code they own. > > > > let's not hold this patch up over it because of it being a broad change > > we lose a lot of time rebasing where either the maintainer or author > > could follow up with a narrow change to correct this. > > Fair enough, the patch doesn't add technical debt at least. > > Acked-by: Dmitry Kozlyuk Thanks Dmitry. Can you please help Ack on V14 which I sent out yesterday? Otherwise, I will send out V15 to carry over this ack from this V13.