From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B0642B94 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 16:05:13 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Nov 2018 07:05:12 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,270,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="283577567" Received: from fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.205]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Nov 2018 07:05:11 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx120.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.208) by fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 07:05:11 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx106.gar.corp.intel.com (10.223.43.196) by fmsmsx120.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.208) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 07:05:11 -0800 Received: from bgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.234]) by BGSMSX106.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.107]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 20:35:08 +0530 From: "Varghese, Vipin" To: "Pattan, Reshma" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "thomas@monjalon.net" , "stephen@networkplumber.org" , "Mcnamara, John" CC: "Byrne, Stephen1" , "Glynn, Michael J" , "Patel, Amol" Thread-Topic: [PATCH v4 5/9] app/procinfo: add support for show tm Thread-Index: AQHUdc+zPfVf/p7zD0i8dNfiuPEpQaVaBQMAgAHdNJCAARuHAIAAdxGA//+lqACAAGIkoP//tUMAgABdKbA= Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 15:05:07 +0000 Message-ID: <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C1B26@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> References: <20181106124912.40700-1-vipin.varghese@intel.com> <20181106124912.40700-5-vipin.varghese@intel.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A3D58A3@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C1435@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A3D61A6@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C1A45@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A3D6264@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> <4C9E0AB70F954A408CC4ADDBF0F8FA7D4D2C1A79@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A3D62FB@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A3D62FB@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiY2Q5MmRlYjMtMDM5OS00M2FmLWI2MmEtNDRiNjg5OWU3OWI4IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoidjVPTDVwN1NhYVAzRzB1QUQxYUZPVWk1V21aejhVQUxJWXd1QlJnWWVcL2RlU1VRcGZTZVpJTDFYSXdacXF0T1cifQ== dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.400.15 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.223.10.10] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 5/9] app/procinfo: add support for show tm X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 15:05:13 -0000 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + if ((ret) | (!is_leaf)) > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is the operator here should be || ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Check is done for 'if either ret is not 0 or if it ret is 0 > > > > > > but not leaf' we skip leaf details print. If 'ret is 0 and is l= eaf' > > > > > > we skip continue to print > > > > > leaf details. > > > > > > > > > > IMO, using logical operator over bitwise operator is good here > > > > > in if statement > > > > . > > > > > Like below.? > > > > > > > > > > If (ret || (is_leaf =3D=3D 0 )) > > > > > > > > Thanks for the information, if the logic is correct do I need to > > > > change for v6 > > > > > > > > > > OK in v6, but you can wait to hear more comments from others if any > > > before sending v6 . > > > > Ok thanks Reshma, but can you tell me how the earlier logic fails and > > runs slow compared to logical or? >=20 > Not about faster or slower. Now I see, I was wondering the suggestion was for improvement for performan= ce. >=20 > Logical operators are commonly used in decision making in C programming. > Bitwise operators are used in C programming to perform bit-level operatio= ns. >=20 Agreed > Since , above if condition is for decision making here logical || operato= r will fit > , so I am suggesting to use that. >=20 But bitwise OR is not wrong right? > We don't need to do any bitwise manipulation in if condition to make the > decision, so bitwise | operator is not needed We can correct this in next patch set not v6 if this is only change for 'sh= ow tm'