18/06/2022 15:09, Huichao Cai пишет:
To resolve the compilation warning,replace the rte_memcpy with memcpy.
Modify in file test_ipfrag.c and rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c.
Signed-off-by: Huichao Cai <chcch...@163.com>
---
app/test/test_ipfrag.c | 13 ++++++-------
lib/ip_frag/rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c | 7 +++----
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test/test_ipfrag.c b/app/test/test_ipfrag.c
index dc62b0e..ba0ffd0 100644
--- a/app/test/test_ipfrag.c
+++ b/app/test/test_ipfrag.c
@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@
#include <rte_ip_frag.h>
#include <rte_mbuf.h>
-#include <rte_memcpy.h>
#include <rte_random.h>
#define NUM_MBUFS 128
@@ -147,13 +146,13 @@ static void ut_teardown(void)
if (opt_copied) {
expected_opt->len =
sizeof(expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_copied);
- rte_memcpy(expected_opt->data,
+ memcpy(expected_opt->data,
expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_copied,
sizeof(expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_copied));
} else {
expected_opt->len =
sizeof(expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied);
- rte_memcpy(expected_opt->data,
+ memcpy(expected_opt->data,
expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied,
sizeof(expected_first_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied));
}
@@ -161,13 +160,13 @@ static void ut_teardown(void)
if (opt_copied) {
expected_opt->len =
sizeof(expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_copied);
- rte_memcpy(expected_opt->data,
+ memcpy(expected_opt->data,
expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_copied,
sizeof(expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_copied));
} else {
expected_opt->len =
sizeof(expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied);
- rte_memcpy(expected_opt->data,
+ memcpy(expected_opt->data,
expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied,
sizeof(expected_sub_frag_ipv4_opts_nocopied));
}
@@ -227,7 +226,7 @@ static void ut_teardown(void)
hdr->src_addr = rte_cpu_to_be_32(0x8080808);
hdr->dst_addr = rte_cpu_to_be_32(0x8080404);
- rte_memcpy(hdr + 1, opt.data, opt.len);
+ memcpy(hdr + 1, opt.data, opt.len);
}
static void
@@ -312,7 +311,7 @@ static void ut_teardown(void)
char *iph_opt = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(mb[i],
char *, sizeof(struct rte_ipv4_hdr));
opt->len = opt_len;
- rte_memcpy(opt->data, iph_opt, opt_len);
+ memcpy(opt->data, iph_opt, opt_len);
} else {
opt->len = RTE_IPV4_HDR_OPT_MAX_LEN;
memset(opt->data, RTE_IPV4_HDR_OPT_EOL,
diff --git a/lib/ip_frag/rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c
b/lib/ip_frag/rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c
index a19f6fd..27a8ad2 100644
--- a/lib/ip_frag/rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c
+++ b/lib/ip_frag/rte_ipv4_fragmentation.c
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
#include <stddef.h>
#include <errno.h>
-#include <rte_memcpy.h>
#include <rte_ether.h>
#include "ip_frag_common.h"
@@ -26,7 +25,7 @@ static inline void __fill_ipv4hdr_frag(struct rte_ipv4_hdr
*dst,
const struct rte_ipv4_hdr *src, uint16_t header_len,
uint16_t len, uint16_t fofs, uint16_t dofs, uint32_t mf)
{
- rte_memcpy(dst, src, header_len);
+ memcpy(dst, src, header_len);
I am fine with replacements in test and inside the lib, for cases
where 'len' parameter is constant value.
Though as I said before, here 'header_len' is not a constant value.
Are you sure it will not introduce any performance regression?
fofs = (uint16_t)(fofs + (dofs >> RTE_IPV4_HDR_FO_SHIFT));
fofs = (uint16_t)(fofs | mf << RTE_IPV4_HDR_MF_SHIFT);
dst->fragment_offset = rte_cpu_to_be_16(fofs);
@@ -48,7 +47,7 @@ static inline uint16_t __create_ipopt_frag_hdr(uint8_t *iph,
struct rte_ipv4_hdr *iph_opt = (struct rte_ipv4_hdr *)ipopt_frag_hdr;
ipopt_len = 0;
- rte_memcpy(ipopt_frag_hdr, iph, sizeof(struct rte_ipv4_hdr));
+ memcpy(ipopt_frag_hdr, iph, sizeof(struct rte_ipv4_hdr));
ipopt_frag_hdr += sizeof(struct rte_ipv4_hdr);
uint8_t *p_opt = iph + sizeof(struct rte_ipv4_hdr);
@@ -65,7 +64,7 @@ static inline uint16_t __create_ipopt_frag_hdr(uint8_t *iph,
break;
if (RTE_IPV4_HDR_OPT_COPIED(*p_opt)) {
- rte_memcpy(ipopt_frag_hdr + ipopt_len,
+ memcpy(ipopt_frag_hdr + ipopt_len,
p_opt, p_opt[1]);
ipopt_len += p_opt[1];
}
