From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com (mail-pd0-f172.google.com
 [209.85.192.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD115A40
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Sat, 16 May 2015 01:53:44 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by pdbqa5 with SMTP id qa5so34476767pdb.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 15 May 2015 16:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to
 :references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=e0CZYm1NhReCjxdXjyPcpRWblhCXHGtyGh/zU/h67es=;
 b=ZDpCe7NimvKunjr+8hiXktjB4vzCpp/cNUz9hTeW815t2shCDWpGIRtq7OWJpobzY+
 ydcSXWP7FuODW7dcIOCnpiubDFhjKYDnF2khAXjP1zzM9dYUbzBJmlEcx6BsWOckG2Uy
 azNjfEHW1AMN7WrZR8gHGtX7d0bsSX+mPYs/AkM7s37hTbg/M9m557cYZAsRM9aoz4Se
 W/YkC4zUXTBLcW/MiURd0vytSuFZdIuwkmHyhM1222SH0fVVDciOHT9UxJfi6wVtwKhw
 LtAjrOqVb8rB+gvWWph9IvNvWbNYuyHdvh7OQXdlG7Ln1ojP91Oc77ghGcXUUneC+Gk1
 oMGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkDhnph/t4J+MsKYmxYTmUfoRpiQB6SeXGrBpgjLB0Ef7MwrQjeDyJL1PV2aKbBBW6MN2Lk
X-Received: by 10.70.47.68 with SMTP id b4mr22719660pdn.33.1431734023239;
 Fri, 15 May 2015 16:53:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from urahara (static-50-53-82-155.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net.
 [50.53.82.155])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id af1sm2950301pad.34.2015.05.15.16.53.42
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Fri, 15 May 2015 16:53:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 16:53:45 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Jijiang Liu <jijiang.liu@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20150515165345.007a8919@urahara>
In-Reply-To: <1431670141-7835-2-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com>
References: <1431670141-7835-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com>
 <1431670141-7835-2-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 01/10] examples/tep_termination:initialize
 the VXLAN sample
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 23:53:44 -0000

I agree that this is great to see a real example of this

On Fri, 15 May 2015 14:08:52 +0800
Jijiang Liu <jijiang.liu@intel.com> wrote:

> +static unsigned
> +check_ports_num(unsigned nb_ports)
> +{
> +	unsigned valid_nb_ports = nb_ports;
> +	unsigned portid;
> +
> +	if (nb_ports > nb_ports) {
> +		RTE_LOG(INFO, VHOST_PORT, "\nSpecified port number(%u) exceeds total system port number(%u)\n",
> +			nb_ports, nb_ports);
> +		nb_ports = nb_ports;

This looks repetative, and wrong, is it something to shut up a compiler warning?
or something that happened as result of global replace?