From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier MATZ Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add rte_mempool_free Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:32:51 +0200 Message-ID: <573AC923.8070706@6wind.com> References: <1463416935-82998-1-git-send-email-benjamin.walker@intel.com> <815F2AB2-EBA1-4097-91B6-14DDD18497BE@intel.com> <1463428590.2522.160.camel@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Walker, Benjamin" , "Wiles, Keith" , "dev@dpdk.org" Return-path: Received: from proxy.6wind.com (host.76.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com [62.23.145.76]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECEAB5A95 for ; Tue, 17 May 2016 09:33:04 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <1463428590.2522.160.camel@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hello Benjamin, On 05/16/2016 09:56 PM, Walker, Benjamin wrote: > On Mon, 2016-05-16 at 16:57 +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote: >>> >>> There is no inverse of rte_mempool_create, so this patch adds one. >>> The typical usage of rte_mempool_create is to create a pool at >>> initialization time and only to free it upon program exit, so an >>> rte_mempool_free function at first seems to be of little value. >>> However, it is very useful as a sanity check for a clean shutdown >>> when used in conjunction with tools like AddressSanitizer. Further, >>> the call itself verifies that all elements have been returned to >>> the pool or it fails. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ben Walker I already submitted a patch introducing a similar feature. Please see: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/12062/ It is part of a larger patchset: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-April/037464.html Regards, Olivier