[PATCH v3 02/16] bpf: stop using variadic argument pack extension

[Tyler Retzlaff]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 01:34:59PM +0000, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 9:20 PM Tyler Retzlaff
> > <roretzla at linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Use RTE_LOG_LINE_PREFIX instead of RTE_LOG_LINE in macro expansions
> > > which allow a prefix and arguments to be inserted into the log line
> > > without the need to use the ## args variadic argument pack extension.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla at linux.microsoft.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> > > index 1a3d97d..680b1e5 100644
> > > --- a/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> > > +++ b/lib/bpf/bpf_impl.h
> > > @@ -29,8 +29,8 @@ struct rte_bpf {
> > >  extern int rte_bpf_logtype;
> > >  #define RTE_LOGTYPE_BPF rte_bpf_logtype
> > >
> > > -#define        RTE_BPF_LOG_LINE(lvl, fmt, args...) \
> > > -       RTE_LOG_LINE(lvl, BPF, fmt, ##args)
> > > +#define RTE_BPF_LOG_LINE(level, ...) \
> > > +       RTE_LOG_LINE_PREFIX(level, BPF, "%s(): ", __func__, __VA_ARGS__)
> > 
> > The patch $topic seems to be removal of variadic argument extension.
> > So, I would expect a simple:
> > +#define RTE_BPF_LOG_LINE(level, ...) \
> > +       RTE_LOG_LINE(level, BPF, __VA_ARGS__)
> > 
> > Konstantin, just to be sure, are you ok with this (debug from my pov)
> > prefix addition?
> > 
> 
> Thanks David for spotting it, yes somehow I missed that.
> Actually yes, yours variant looks correct to me.
> Konstantin.

oh, sorry about this. i did not intend to add prefixes where there were
none. would you like me to restore this with David's suggestion or would
you like to keep the prefix with __func__?

let me know i'll make an adjustment to the series if necessary.

>