From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDDEBA09E8;
	Wed, 19 Oct 2022 20:08:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C8C742BF9;
	Wed, 19 Oct 2022 20:08:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4152742BE9
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 19 Oct 2022 20:08:55 +0200 (CEST)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [PATCH] telemetry: support boolean type
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 20:08:53 +0200
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D8741A@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
In-Reply-To: <Y1AqN9NnjBjpTsf+@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] telemetry: support boolean type
Thread-Index: Adjj2pbrZirVp5ReRrGL+PGTozchmwACsCUg
References: <20221019073702.3948624-1-david.marchand@redhat.com>
 <Y1AABobg98qzGTgE@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <CAJFAV8z+en7A1n4RLpooHWLFe4wpJVyk2Q-0_SHOm-U_MgEKOg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y1AqN9NnjBjpTsf+@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 "David Marchand" <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Ciara Power" <ciara.power@intel.com>
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 19 October 2022 18.48
>=20
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 04:28:58PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 3:48 PM Bruce Richardson
> > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 09:37:02AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > > > Add the boolean type RTE_TEL_BOOL_VAL for values in arrays and
> dicts.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > > > ---

[...]

> > > > +/* Appends a boolean into the JSON array in the provided =
buffer.
> */
> > > > +static inline int
> > > > +rte_tel_json_add_array_bool(char *buf, const int len, const int
> used,
> > > > +             bool val)
> > > > +{
> > > > +     int ret, end =3D used - 1; /* strip off final delimiter */
> > > > +     if (used <=3D 2) /* assume empty, since minimum is '[]' */
> > > > +             return __json_snprintf(buf, len, "[%s]",
> > > > +                             val ? "true" : "false");
> > > > +
> > > > +     ret =3D __json_snprintf(buf + end, len - end, ",%s]",
> > > > +                     val ? "true" : "false");
> > >
> > > Wonder if it's worthwhile doing a macro for this conditional, =
since
> the
> > > same ternary-operator snippet appears 4 times in this code.
> >
> > Err, naming it would be hard and I don't see for now how we could
> reuse it.
> >
> Yes, and I see Morten has objected from a readability perspective, so
> keeping as-is is fine.
>=20
> One final suggestion though might be to have an array with the strings
> as so:
>=20
> const char *bool_str[2] =3D { "false", "true" };
>=20
> and then in the code use "bool_str[val]" in place of ternary operator.

I don't consider that more readable than the original.

> (From a quick check with godbolt is looks like bool params are clamped
> to 0
> or 1 on function call, but if we want to be paranoid, we can lookup
> based
> on [!!val])
>=20
> However, ok to keep code as-is for this too.

Thank you, yes, please.

>=20
> /Bruce