Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: mvpp2: use the same buffer pool for all ports

From: Antoine Tenart <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 11:48:13 +0100

Hi Thomas,

On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 05:01:59PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Fri,  2 Mar 2018 16:40:40 +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote:
> > +static struct {
> > +	int pkt_size;
> > +	int buf_num;
> > +} mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_POOLS_NUM];
> 
> Any reason for not doing:
> 
> } mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_POOLS_NUM] = {
> 	[MVPP2_BM_SHORT] = {
> 		.pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_PKT_SIZE,
> 		.buf_num = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_BUF_NUM
> 	},
> 	[MVPP2_BM_LONG] = {
> 		.pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE,
> 		.buf_num = MVPP2_BM_LONG_BUF_NUM,
> 	},
> };
> 
> And get rid of:
> 
> > +static void mvpp2_setup_bm_pool(void)
> > +{
> > +	/* Short pool */
> > +	mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_SHORT].buf_num  = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_BUF_NUM;
> > +	mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_SHORT].pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_PKT_SIZE;
> > +
> > +	/* Long pool */
> > +	mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_LONG].buf_num  = MVPP2_BM_LONG_BUF_NUM;
> > +	mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_LONG].pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE;
> > +}
> 
>  ?

I wanted to do this, but it's no possible as MVPP2_BM_SHORT_PKT_SIZE and
MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE use a core definition which expands at some point
to __max(...) which has to be called from within a function.

That's why I kept mvpp2_setup_bm_pool().

Thanks!
Antoine

-- 
Antoine Ténart, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons)
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com