From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
<stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"Tyler Retzlaff" <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
<ranjit.menon@intel.com>, <mdr@ashroe.eu>,
<david.marchand@redhat.com>, <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>,
<bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: propose correction rte_{bsf, fls} inline functions type use
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 09:45:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86C5E@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4152307.NZnTyprsWH@thomas>
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Monday, 25 October 2021 21.14
>
> 15/03/2021 20:34, Tyler Retzlaff:
> > The proposal has resulted from request to review [1] the following
> > functions where there appeared to be inconsistency in return type
> > or parameter type selections for the following inline functions.
> >
> > rte_bsf32()
> > rte_bsf32_safe()
> > rte_bsf64()
> > rte_bsf64_safe()
> > rte_fls_u32()
> > rte_fls_u64()
> > rte_log2_u32()
> > rte_log2_u64()
> >
> > [1] http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-March/201590.html
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>
> > ---
> > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
> > +* eal: Fix inline function return and parameter types for
> rte_{bsf,fls}
> > + inline functions to be consistent.
> > + Change ``rte_bsf32_safe`` parameter ``v`` from ``uint64_t`` to
> ``uint32_t``.
> > + Change ``rte_bsf64`` return type to ``uint32_t`` instead of
> ``int``.
> > + Change ``rte_fls_u32`` return type to ``uint32_t`` instead of
> ``int``.
> > + Change ``rte_fls_u64`` return type to ``uint32_t`` instead of
> ``int``.
>
> It seems we completely forgot this.
> How critical is it?
Not updating has near zero effect on bug probability: Incorrectly returning signed int instead of unsigned int is extremely unlikely to cause problems.
Updating has near zero performance improvement: The unnecessary expansion of a parameter value from 32 to 64 bits is cheap.
The update's only tangible benefit is API consistency. :-)
-Morten
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-26 7:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-10 23:24 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: propose correction rte_bsf64 return type declaration Tyler Retzlaff
2021-03-15 19:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: propose correction rte_{bsf, fls} inline functions type use Tyler Retzlaff
2021-10-25 19:14 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-10-26 7:45 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2021-11-11 4:15 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2021-11-11 11:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-11-11 12:41 ` Morten Brørup
2022-07-11 14:07 ` Jerin Jacob
2022-07-13 10:13 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-07-18 21:28 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-08-08 21:21 ` [PATCH 0/3] cleanup bsf and fls inline function return types Tyler Retzlaff
2022-08-08 21:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] doc: announce cleanup of rte_{bsf, fls} inline functions type use Tyler Retzlaff
2022-10-05 9:06 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-08-08 21:21 ` [PATCH 2/3] eal: change rte_fls and rte_bsf to return uint32_t Tyler Retzlaff
2022-10-05 9:02 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-05 15:15 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-10-05 15:23 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-05 15:40 ` [PATCH] eal: fix return type of bsf safe functions Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-05 19:41 ` David Marchand
2022-10-05 22:20 ` Tyler Retzlaff
2022-10-06 0:27 ` Thomas Monjalon
2022-10-06 18:20 ` Mattias Rönnblom
2022-08-08 21:21 ` [PATCH 3/3] test: fix sign compare warning for rte_bsf64 return type change Tyler Retzlaff
2022-08-08 21:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] cleanup bsf and fls inline function return types Stephen Hemminger
2022-08-09 8:26 ` Morten Brørup
2022-10-05 10:11 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86C5E@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com \
--cc=mdr@ashroe.eu \
--cc=ranjit.menon@intel.com \
--cc=roretzla@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).