From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2888711C5 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:01:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Mar 2015 08:01:29 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,452,1422950400"; d="scan'208";a="696388003" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.243.20.28]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 23 Mar 2015 08:01:26 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:01:24 +0025 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:01:24 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: Thomas Monjalon Message-ID: <20150323150124.GB12720@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <178390751.P840gF6HAz@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <178390751.P840gF6HAz@xps13> Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Rx/Tx callbacks in debug mode X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 15:01:31 -0000 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 03:31:48PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hi, > > As you may know, rte_eth_rx_burst() and rte_eth_tx_burst() have a > debug-specific implementation enabled with RTE_LIBRTE_ETHDEV_DEBUG. > I'm afraid these implementations have been forgotten when adding > optional Rx/Tx callbacks. Or is it intended? > > What do you think of removing these debug functions and insert extra > checks with ifdef in an unique function? The omission was unintentional. I think removing duplicate functions and using a common version, if possible, is always a good idea, or else things like this keep happening! :-) /Bruce