> From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru] > Sent: Sunday, 6 November 2022 13.00 > > On 11/6/22 14:50, Morten Brørup wrote: > >> From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru] > >> Sent: Sunday, 6 November 2022 12.41 > >> > >> On 11/4/22 15:03, Morten Brørup wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >>> +/** > >>> + * @internal When stats is enabled, store some statistics. > >>> + * > >>> + * @param cache > >>> + * Pointer to the memory pool cache. > >>> + * @param name > >>> + * Name of the statistics field to increment in the memory pool > >> cache. > >>> + * @param n > >>> + * Number to add to the statistics. > >>> + */ > >>> +#ifdef RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_STATS > >>> +#define RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_STAT_ADD(cache, name, n) (cache)- > >>> stats.name += n > >> > >> I'd enclose it in parenthesis. > > > > Me too! I had it surrounded by "do {...} while (0)" in v3, but > checkpatch complained about it [1], so I changed it to the above. Which > checkpatch also complains about. :-( > > I mean > #define RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_STAT_ADD(cache, name, n) \ > ((cache)->stats.name += (n))
Thank you for elaborating, Andrew. I guess this is exactly what the checkpatch error message for v4 [2] says - I just couldn't understand what it wanted me to do. [2]: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2022-November/321345.html I don't always agree with checkpatch, but now Thomas has a third option for how to write this macro when merging. :-) > > > > > [1]: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2022- > November/321316.html > > Yes, I've seen it. > > > > > Feel free to modify this macro at your preference when merging! > > > >> > >>> +#else > >>> +#define RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_STAT_ADD(cache, name, n) do {} while (0) > >>> +#endif > >>> +
