Re: [PATCH v3 00/22] Update MEV TS Base Driver

["Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>]

On 6/12/2024 5:52 AM, Soumyadeep Hore wrote:
> These patches integrate the latest changes in MEV TS IDPF Base driver.
> 
> ---
> v3:
> - Removed additional whitespace changes
> - Fixed warnings of CI
> - Updated documentation relating to MEV TS FW release
> ---

Off list,

I don't know anything about idpf driver, but as far as I'm aware, 
usually when base code is updated, we resolve all #ifdef's by stripping 
these tags and assuming that they were (or were not) defined at compile 
time, so the resulting code is devoid of any compile-time switching. 
This is the biggest question I have for this review.

Is there any reason why you've kept the #ifdef's in this base code 
update? Should we perhaps strip them out and assume NVME_CPF is always 
defined? And if not, then perhaps we should at least provide feedback to 
base driver developers that we'd rather their code handle both cases 
when NVME_CPF is defined, rather than switching between two different 
code paths at compile time with no ability to combine them?

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly