On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:05 AM Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> wrote: > > > From: David Marchand [mailto:david.march...@redhat.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, 14 September 2022 09.58 > > > > Those macros have no real value and are easily replaced with a simple > > if() block. > > > > Existing users have been converted using a new cocci script. > > Deprecate them. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com> > > --- > > [...] > > > /* Macros to check for invalid function pointers */ > > -#define RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(func, retval) do { \ > > +#define RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(func, retval) > > RTE_DEPRECATED(RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET) \ > > +do { \ > > if ((func) == NULL) \ > > return retval; \ > > } while (0) > > > > -#define RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_RET(func) do { \ > > +#define RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_RET(func) RTE_DEPRECATED(RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_RET) > > \ > > +do { \ > > if ((func) == NULL) \ > > return; \ > > } while (0) > > rte_ethdev.h has somewhat similar macros [1]: > > /* Macros to check for valid port */ > #define RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, retval) do { \ > if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { \ > RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid port_id=%u\n", port_id); \ > return retval; \ > } \ > } while (0) > > #define RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_RET(port_id) do { \ > if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { \ > RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Invalid port_id=%u\n", port_id); \ > return; \ > } \ > } while (0) > > However, these log an error message. It makes me wonder about consistency... > > Are the RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_* macros a special case, or should similar macros, > such as RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_*, also be deprecated? > > Or should the RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_* macros be modified to log an error message > instead of being deprecated?
The difference is that those ethdev macros validate something expressed in their name "is this portid valid". The RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_* macros were really just a if() + return block. I don't see what message to log for them. -- David Marchand
