[4/7] test/rcu: use size_t instead of int

Message ID 20190908224949.34851-5-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • typo, doc, simple fixes and some optimizations
Related show

Commit Message

Honnappa Nagarahalli Sept. 8, 2019, 10:49 p.m.
Variables used to store the return value of rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize
in variables of type 'int'. The variables are of type 'size_t' now.

Fixes: b87089b0bb19 ("test/rcu: add API and functional tests")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>

Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>

---
 app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
2.17.1

Comments

Ruifeng Wang Sept. 9, 2019, 3:16 p.m. | #1
> -----Original Message-----

> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Honnappa Nagarahalli

> Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 06:50

> To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>;

> konstantin.ananyev@intel.com

> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org

> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/7] test/rcu: use size_t instead of int

> 

> Variables used to store the return value of rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize in

> variables of type 'int'. The variables are of type 'size_t' now.

> 

> Fixes: b87089b0bb19 ("test/rcu: add API and functional tests")

> Cc: stable@dpdk.org

> 

> Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>

> Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>

> ---

>  app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c | 8 ++++----

>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

> 

> diff --git a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> index cb2d177b7..e0598614c 100644

> --- a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> +++ b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_writer_perf(void *arg)  static int

>  test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)

>  {

> -	int sz;

> +	size_t sz;

>  	unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;

> 

>  	writer_done = 0;

> @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)  static int

>  test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)

>  {

> -	int sz;

> +	size_t sz;

>  	unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;

> 

>  	rte_atomic64_clear(&updates);

> @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)  static int

>  test_rcu_qsbr_wperf(void)

>  {

> -	int sz;

> +	size_t sz;

>  	unsigned int i;

> 

>  	rte_atomic64_clear(&checks);

> @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int

>  test_rcu_qsbr_sw_sv_1qs(void)

>  {

>  	uint64_t token, begin, cycles;

> -	int sz;

> +	size_t sz;

>  	unsigned int i, j, tmp_num_cores;

>  	int32_t pos;

> 

> --

> 2.17.1


The same change is needed by test_rcu_qsbr_sw_sv_1qs_non_blocking.
And there are another 2 occurrences in test_rcu_qsbr.c.
Thanks.
David Marchand Oct. 7, 2019, 2 p.m. | #2
Hello Honnappa,

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 5:17 PM Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)
<Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com> wrote:
>

>

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Honnappa Nagarahalli

> > Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 06:50

> > To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>;

> > konstantin.ananyev@intel.com

> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org

> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/7] test/rcu: use size_t instead of int

> >

> > Variables used to store the return value of rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize in

> > variables of type 'int'. The variables are of type 'size_t' now.

> >

> > Fixes: b87089b0bb19 ("test/rcu: add API and functional tests")

> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org

> >

> > Signed-off-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>

> > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>

> > ---

> >  app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c | 8 ++++----

> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

> >

> > diff --git a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> > index cb2d177b7..e0598614c 100644

> > --- a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> > +++ b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c

> > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_writer_perf(void *arg)  static int

> >  test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)

> >  {

> > -     int sz;

> > +     size_t sz;

> >       unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;

> >

> >       writer_done = 0;

> > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)  static int

> >  test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)

> >  {

> > -     int sz;

> > +     size_t sz;

> >       unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;

> >

> >       rte_atomic64_clear(&updates);

> > @@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)  static int

> >  test_rcu_qsbr_wperf(void)

> >  {

> > -     int sz;

> > +     size_t sz;

> >       unsigned int i;

> >

> >       rte_atomic64_clear(&checks);

> > @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static int

> >  test_rcu_qsbr_sw_sv_1qs(void)

> >  {

> >       uint64_t token, begin, cycles;

> > -     int sz;

> > +     size_t sz;

> >       unsigned int i, j, tmp_num_cores;

> >       int32_t pos;

> >

> > --

> > 2.17.1

>

> The same change is needed by test_rcu_qsbr_sw_sv_1qs_non_blocking.

> And there are another 2 occurrences in test_rcu_qsbr.c.


Ruifeng comment looks valid, can you have a look and submit a new
version of this patch?
Thanks.

-- 
David Marchand

Patch

diff --git a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c
index cb2d177b7..e0598614c 100644
--- a/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c
+++ b/app/test/test_rcu_qsbr_perf.c
@@ -125,7 +125,7 @@  test_rcu_qsbr_writer_perf(void *arg)
 static int
 test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)
 {
-	int sz;
+	size_t sz;
 	unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;
 
 	writer_done = 0;
@@ -188,7 +188,7 @@  test_rcu_qsbr_perf(void)
 static int
 test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)
 {
-	int sz;
+	size_t sz;
 	unsigned int i, tmp_num_cores;
 
 	rte_atomic64_clear(&updates);
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@  test_rcu_qsbr_rperf(void)
 static int
 test_rcu_qsbr_wperf(void)
 {
-	int sz;
+	size_t sz;
 	unsigned int i;
 
 	rte_atomic64_clear(&checks);
@@ -379,7 +379,7 @@  static int
 test_rcu_qsbr_sw_sv_1qs(void)
 {
 	uint64_t token, begin, cycles;
-	int sz;
+	size_t sz;
 	unsigned int i, j, tmp_num_cores;
 	int32_t pos;