On 11/29/2018 3:47 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 29, 2018, at 9:36 AM, Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 29-Nov-18 2:54 PM, Wiles, Keith wrote:
>>>> On Nov 29, 2018, at 8:21 AM, Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We already trigger a mem event notification inside the walk function,
>>>> no need to do it twice.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: f32c7c9de961 ("malloc: enable event callbacks for external memory")
>>>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c | 4 ----
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c
>>>> b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c
>>>> index 0da5ad5e8..750a83c2c 100644
>>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c
>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c
>>>> @@ -518,10 +518,6 @@ sync_memory(const char *heap_name, void *va_addr,
>>>> size_t len, bool attach)
>>>> rte_errno = -wa.result;
>>>> ret = -1;
>>>> } else {
>>>> - /* notify all subscribers that a new memory area was added */
>>>> - if (attach)
>>>> - eal_memalloc_mem_event_notify(RTE_MEM_EVENT_ALLOC,
>>>> - va_addr, len);
>>>> ret = 0;
>>>> }
>>> This change leaves
>>> else {
>>> ret = 0;
>>> }
>>> Needs to be:
>>> else
>>> ret = 0;
>>
>> Checkpatch disagrees :P Brackets are needed everywhere if at least one of
>> the branches is a multiline branch. No brackets needed only if all branches
>> are one-line branches.
>>
>> As a side note, I would also argue that we shouldn't leave bracket-less if
>> statements altogether, because it makes for extra effort whenever a
>> single-line statement inevitably becomes a multiline one (e.g. could be as
>> simple as putting in a debug printf - i now have to add brackets
>> everywhere...). But that's a topic for another day :)
>
> Well it seems to be a very questionable formatting to leave the else with
> brackets in a single line style IMO.
>
> Also look at section 1.6.2 in DPDK coding style as it states something
> different.
>
> * Closing and opening braces go on the same line as the else keyword.
> * Braces that are not necessary should be left out.
>
> if (test)
> stmt;
> else if (bar) {
> stmt;
> stmt;
> } else
> stmt;
>
> Note the last else here. Looking at this code it appears check patch is wrong
> here compared to the DPDK coding style.
Yes we diverge a little there, Linux prefers if a leg of the branch has braces
other legs should have it, we left out braces whenever we can.
