13/10/2017 03:06, Li, Xiaoyun: > Hi > Sorry for the late reply. I took AL last 3 days. > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > 05/10/2017 14:33, Xiaoyun Li: > > > +/** > > > + * Macro for copying unaligned block from one location to another > > > +with constant load offset, > > > + * 47 bytes leftover maximum, > > > + * locations should not overlap. > > > + * Requirements: > > > + * - Store is aligned > > > + * - Load offset is <offset>, which must be immediate value within > > > +[1, 15] > > > + * - For <src>, make sure <offset> bit backwards & <16 - offset> bit > > > +forwards are available for loading > > > + * - <dst>, <src>, <len> must be variables > > > + * - __m128i <xmm0> ~ <xmm8> must be pre-defined */ #define > > > +MOVEUNALIGNED_LEFT47_IMM(dst, src, len, > > > > Naive question: > > Is there a real benefit of using a macro compared to a static inline > > function > > optimized by a modern compiler? > > > The macro is in the existing DPDK codes. I didn't touch it. I just change the > file name and the function name to rte_memcpy_internal. > So I am not clear about if there is real benefit. > In my opinion, I think it is the same as static inline function. > > Do I need to change them to inline function?
In this patch, it appears as a new macro. If you can, inline function is cleaner for the new one. > > Anyway, if you are doing a new version, please reduce lines length and fix > > the indent from spaces to tabs. > > > They are original DPDK codes so I didn't touch them. > But in next version, I will fix them. Just to be sure: we are talking about fixing checkpatch warnings only for the code added, changed or moved. Thanks
