Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix runtime dead code

["Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yigit, Ferruh
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 3:28 AM
> To: Jastrzebski, MichalX K <michalx.k.jastrzebski@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Jain, Deepak K <deepak.k.jain@intel.com>; Kulasek,
> TomaszX <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>; Chilikin, Andrey
> <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix runtime dead code
> 
> On 9/29/2017 1:56 PM, Michal Jastrzebski wrote:
> > From: Tomasz Kulasek <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
> >
> > Coverity reports DEADCODE, as assumes that RTE_LIBRTE_I40E_PMD is
> > defined and function compiles entirely.
> > The fix is about to place printf function into #else branch of
> > conditional compilation, since it is known at compile time if i40e is
> > supported. No need to check it at runtime.
> 
> This is to highlight this is not supported other than defined PMD, and used like
> this in similar functions, I am for keeping this and marking coverity item as
> false positive.
> 
> Hi Jingjing,
> 
> What do you think, if you have strong opinion to get this, I will.
> 
> Thanks,
> ferruh
> 
> >

Hi, Ferruh

Checked other funcs called PMD specific API. And it seems all of them handle
That in the same way. So, to keep consistent, we may not need to apply this patch.

I agree with you to mark coverity item to no problem.

Thanks
Jingjing