From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <viktorin@rehivetech.com>
Received: from wes1-so1.wedos.net (wes1-so1.wedos.net [46.28.106.15])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1371B8D9F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:24:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz (pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz
 [147.229.13.147])
 by wes1-so1.wedos.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3nl1hQ63ZczYm;
 Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:24:22 +0100 (CET)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 17:22:35 +0100
From: Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>
To: David Hunt <david.hunt@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20151026172235.653d0573@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
In-Reply-To: <1445609833-17649-6-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
References: <1445609833-17649-1-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
 <1445609833-17649-6-git-send-email-david.hunt@intel.com>
Organization: RehiveTech
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Benjamin Boren <Ben.Boren@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 05/11] lib: add armv8 rte_memcpy.h
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: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 16:24:23 -0000

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 15:17:07 +0100
David Hunt <david.hunt@intel.com> wrote:

> +		     "LDP q0, q1, [%0 , #192]\n\t"
> +		     "STP q0, q1, [%1 , #192]\n\t"
> +		     "LDP q0, q1, [%0 , #224]\n\t"
> +		     "STP q0, q1, [%1 , #224]\n\t"
> +		     : : "r" (src), "r" (dst) :
> +	);
> +}
> +/*
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov16(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 16); }
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov32(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 32); }
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov64(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 64); }
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov128(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 128); }
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov256(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 256); }
> +static inline void
> +	rte_mov48(uint8_t *dst, const uint8_t *src) { memcpy(dst, src, 48); }
> +*/

I think, as this is commented out, it should be omitted from the patch.

Jan

> +#define rte_memcpy(dst, src, n)              \
> +	({ (__builtin_constant_p(n)) ?       \
> +	memcpy((dst), (src), (n)) :          \
> +	rte_memcpy_func((dst), (src), (n)); })
> +
> +


-- 
   Jan Viktorin                  E-mail: Viktorin@RehiveTech.com
   System Architect              Web:    www.RehiveTech.com
   RehiveTech
   Brno, Czech Republic