From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] eal: add API to align integer to
 previous power of 2
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 19:30:40 +0000
Message-ID: <AM4PR0501MB2657D0F68F4FFB3E9172DAB1D2C00@AM4PR0501MB2657.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20180217104934.17291-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <20180219113643.10337-1-pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
 <AM4PR0501MB26573D7AD80F83C590A8297FD2C80@AM4PR0501MB2657.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
 <20180226191017.GA9950@ltp-pvn>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>,
 "jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com" <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 "keith.wiles@intel.com" <keith.wiles@intel.com>, Thomas Monjalon
 <thomas@monjalon.net>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from EUR02-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-eopbgr00058.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.0.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150D42A7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 20:30:42 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20180226191017.GA9950@ltp-pvn>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi Pavan

From: Pavan Nikhilesh, Monday, February 26, 2018 9:10 PM
> Hi Matan,
>=20
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:09:46PM +0000, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > Since you are using the same 5 lines from the rte_align32pow2() functio=
n, I
>> think this part can be in a separate function to do reuse.
> > Also the "fill ones 32" function can be used for other purpose.
> > What do you think?
>=20
> I do agree that it would be cleaner to have a common function for both, b=
ut
> not able to decide on a appropriate function name "fill ones 32" doesn't
> convey what the function truly does. If you have a cleaner name do sugges=
t, i
> will roll up a v3 adding the function and experimental tag.

Sure.

I'm suggesting next names:
rte_combine32ms1b(register uint32_t x)
rte_combine64ms1b(register uint64_t x)

The description may be something like:
combine the upper bits into the LSBs to construct a value with the same mos=
t significant 1 as x but all 1's under it.

I would add the register keyword for each variables in all the align functi=
ons here just to hint for the compiler that it's better to save this variab=
les in register and not in memory. =20

Matan.
> Thanks,
> Pavan
>=20
> >
> >