Hi Robert,
On 08/23/2016 06:07 PM, Sanford, Robert wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> On 8/23/16, 11:09 AM, "Olivier MATZ" <olivier.matz at 6wind.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> On 08/01/2016 10:42 PM, Robert Sanford wrote:
> > Rename macros that calculate a mempool cache flush threshold, and
> > move them from rte_mempool.c to rte_mempool.h, so that the bonding
> > driver can accurately calculate its mbuf requirements.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Sanford <rsanford at akamai.com>
> > ---
> > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 8 ++------
> > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 7 +++++++
> > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > --- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
> > @@ -263,6 +263,13 @@ struct rte_mempool {
> > #define MEMPOOL_F_NO_PHYS_CONTIG 0x0020 /**< Don't need physically
> contiguous objs. */
> >
> > /**
> > + * Calculate the threshold before we flush excess elements.
> > + */
> > +#define RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_FLUSHTHRESH_MULTIPLIER 1.5
> > +#define RTE_MEMPOOL_CALC_CACHE_FLUSHTHRESH(c) \
> > + ((typeof(c))((c) * RTE_MEMPOOL_CACHE_FLUSHTHRESH_MULTIPLIER))
> > +
> > +/**
> > * @internal When debug is enabled, store some statistics.
> > *
> > * @param mp
> >
>
> What do you think of using a static inline function instead of a macro ?
>
>
> Regards,
> Olivier
> --
>
> Yes, an inline function is better than a macro. We still need to move the
> #define MULTIPLIER from rte_mempool.c to rte_mempool.h.
>
> How is this for the prototype?
> static inline unsigned rte_mempool_calc_cache_flushthresh(unsigned cache_size)
>
> Where in the .h should we place the function, right below the MULTIPLIER
> definition?
Yep, looks good, thanks.
Maybe "unsigned" -> "unsigned int", because checkpatch may complain...
Regards,
Olivier
