From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A633CA04DB; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 17:56:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CC41EA7E; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 17:56:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF1601D541 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 17:56:38 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: E21qeiwT9z0eQQhk7AIHs4mxdbE4H7JY8DzUbgaTatpuizsoSU5tO+vTYbgUSx3P/jz/wf06lq ojtRe9xDX95Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9776"; a="230822699" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,383,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="230822699" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Oct 2020 08:56:37 -0700 IronPort-SDR: LKzLAPN+JMOVfoXwJY0JYZk76J0jCrP1CamCYBEUhV6GRUtXNP4a+hGLJ9KlntMnuYo3337wYZ dpx/egHC8oGw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,383,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="531766605" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.19.66]) ([10.252.19.66]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Oct 2020 08:56:34 -0700 To: Konstantin Ananyev , dev@dpdk.org Cc: jerinj@marvell.com, ruifeng.wang@arm.com, vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com, Thomas Monjalon , David Marchand References: <20201005184526.7465-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <20201006150316.5776-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <20201006150316.5776-13-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:56:33 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201006150316.5776-13-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 12/14] acl: deduplicate AVX512 code paths 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 10/6/2020 4:03 PM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote: > Current rte_acl_classify_avx512x32() and rte_acl_classify_avx512x16() > code paths are very similar. The only differences are due to > 256/512 register/instrincts naming conventions. > So to deduplicate the code: > - Move common code into “acl_run_avx512_common.h” > - Use macros to hide difference in naming conventions > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <...> > @@ -120,7 +161,7 @@ _m256_mask_gather_epi8x4(__m256i pdata, __mmask8 mask) > > static const uint32_t zero; icc complains about this, although it is static [1]. Would it be acceptable to initialize variable explicitly to '0'? [1] In file included from ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_avx512.c(110): ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_avx512x8.h(162): warning #300: const variable "zero" requires an initializer static const uint32_t zero; ^ In file included from ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_avx512.c(137): ../lib/librte_acl/acl_run_avx512x16.h(198): warning #300: const variable "zero" requires an initializer static const uint32_t zero; ^