From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com (mail-wm0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50436558B for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:04:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id n129so19154703wmn.1 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:04:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=prgY2mJj802usybLpBSQdwpBFha8zcR1p1HQfnW++Pw=; b=hmj3DiKfP9EzZTjDoiCsjT2t6GW0BhRPk0q57ha+zYeiuifXE4dmwdqY4IlBX4xRwz xkHjTxBmGsUdgIl5rx1mCT9+6AQN24HdWWHzy9z7zwfiYl4AhWGV5sqHLE95XCPmPqnz cHwWop8o3uwzdVkSz9h7UvRlH7iBi2jprG6NiR1c39TI0w5D0nIYqjwqRvOpMB8Y8KT0 7XrUtchksZAjMfREIJWV5BACMqPMzyeiCCPH5U0uSRUJ+6YVOJk9XYeslOP9sU3fDkC/ Cf6FiLrrW/XvSF7qgQ9tYWq0c8LAxyVfN8sBM35Pwam1WUJAV8kfpuw2E4OoJ+IGLhOT sibg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=prgY2mJj802usybLpBSQdwpBFha8zcR1p1HQfnW++Pw=; b=Hqf3C9l6oCuOFjRzwpvBZJ8Y8+rgoWKY1mHUsQ/8Zp2PcsOfIi24BOW5OAztl+TEqF +8tNGf2mzTwoDG/5aMFoiM7W2gvo2OLVE1amya2ZlRDF9aOYScM5+uGOuvAhP0jTlSYD 0b6H1nYTqtxQHYRxK7lw+mVZjzr07W6iQwI9uROQWCX4AezZOjOE4N8Gp2hZ5Q3GZZBH IYj4s+wmxLUc6nXNmXUE8/YKfP0NYmkvUBgLjAkK33W7Pb3nyk+gjDMD8wp+XP+tcF2/ 5FbJQ/xUINQzBR8mmptsWO8lw4gQj9bucxxy7aLnSSZ2cf393JeoR7LHSa/D7+Vv2x5Z 7NEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWMgye3B1OxLUmESUbFrf/sL2eg3VlU7XryAKe298N9tX1BgqDqPP+8s+BeAv1fM5ie X-Received: by 10.28.131.195 with SMTP id f186mr2494615wmd.97.1461920695120; Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:04:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (51.111.75.86.rev.sfr.net. [86.75.111.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y3sm13734032wji.40.2016.04.29.02.04.53 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 02:04:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Hemminger , Yuanhan Liu Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:04:52 +0200 Message-ID: <4314823.GZ8AKUaKyk@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20160422154239.5a3edecf@xeon-e3> References: <1461332640-24273-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <20160422220850.GF7603@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20160422154239.5a3edecf@xeon-e3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] eal: add assert macro for debug 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: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 09:04:55 -0000 2016-04-22 15:42, Stephen Hemminger: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 15:08:50 -0700 > Yuanhan Liu wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:14:35PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > rxd = (Vmxnet3_RxDesc *)rxq->cmd_ring[ring_idx].base + idx; > > > + RTE_SET_USED(rxd); /* used only for assert when enabled */ > > > > How about adding the __rte_unused tag at where we declare it? It is not really unused. And adding a SET_USED line allows to put a comment in the context below the assignment. > Why not just kill the useless assert's all together? They really only helped > during the short time developer is debugging this code. They also provide some kind of comments and can help when refactoring. Anyway, removing the assert would deserve another patch.