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 BFF2CA0542; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:12:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AE3D4069D; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:12:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E9074003C for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:12:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 486E05C0144; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:12:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:12:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1661778760; x= 1661865160; bh=yqln6PPl13dtKJWf+SuIDLgdKfyt7U8Vm/4XX2W6GFs=; b=O 96QSVZzQhUs7GxDlk/tGizA6KAjvDjzhS5sUSM/luvNc3wwEpIQ0StHDkMSeL0H8 Z6t22Y25R2Ed0bwsJmMAsq+qCBM8sLHZqoUyAjyxxRW6vfm9AQ8v4FG8oTLhLFel dWeRwKaOVarJPTyCBrBtrLvX2CFfgSHYmrE8m2+y61+MS268gsVezm7f3pPhiIpb 2IW3W49ofaFfoGKApDqwO2PrC2KvVnq+J5o7vsqerQrYRaItKhBQRZTXCZ0rUD8y LXzDP9jxylnBD6+r6q5EbmNLpXj7vOM82rzzmB3akSvWHUK14N3N6n2rTPQ076Gm uU7e1DRDgntJgyOtBMldw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1661778760; x= 1661865160; bh=yqln6PPl13dtKJWf+SuIDLgdKfyt7U8Vm/4XX2W6GFs=; b=t XGLdjwk/EAupjRc1p+O5AE3Z+wrLwjs+RBaBCwTTTwSKSUjmsPMt6dke14YOQRlp fEUt5oSKXMk/lpbAD6zEqi5J4e+Eyv5En9ZlFM1e1RP0izOw0zIIR+USz5oRG0Qg gZfg4aKGWHABrlQFDsLR+laCUJX2Nn3kWL/6n2cDjVFffup8HpeZKEO9rPs17znV OXhm7hYYV9cuwM5XTGfYVkZfn/gj6ZrbgjBnGjv8FLrKSFFOjcwLoiPBOs58tgtb idup9eMsXpCC/veeM8JLSQheB4VI10wrtqoIy9RsfEKgZj8UO8624Ap8elcDAPh0 ksxZaXyUTZmBsGfje/lBg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrvdekuddgieefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtudenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeefhfejleeuvdevtddutdeutdevhfeijeethfffueejhfetuddu vedtkedtieekffenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 29 Aug 2022 09:12:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru, dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: rte_mov256 was missing for AVX2 Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:12:37 +0200 Message-ID: <2996728.ktpJ11cQ8Q@thomas> In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D872CB@smartserver.smartshare.dk> References: <20220820103032.119741-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com> <10793250.BaYr0rKQ5T@thomas> <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D872CB@smartserver.smartshare.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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 29/08/2022 14:18, Morten Br=F8rup: > At SmartShare Systems we follow a coding convention of including the decl= aration header file at the absolute top of the file implementing it. This r= eveals at build time if anything is missing in the declaration header file.= The DPDK Project could do the same, and find bugs like this. >=20 > Here's an example: >=20 > foo.h: > ------ > // Declaration > static inline uint32_t bar(uint32_t x); >=20 > foo.c: > ------ > #include // <-- Note: At the absolute top! > #include >=20 > // Implementation > static inline uint32_t bar(uint32_t x) > { > return x * 2; > } >=20 > Following our coding convention will reveal that is required f= or using , and thus should be included in foo.h (not in foo.c) - bec= ause someone else might include , and then could be missi= ng there. Yes we could follow this convention.