From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ilya Matveychikov Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mbuf: cleanup rte_pktmbuf_lastseg(), fix atomic usage Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 13:32:13 +0400 Message-ID: <5C1B1043-3444-4750-A7AB-D96403C61E42@gmail.com> References: <20171115091413.27119-1-hhaim@cisco.com> <1D98684F-B8A9-4037-8534-0D4E3A1FD34C@gmail.com> <20171115173058.mrkrv3usbl5sfw3h@platinum> <2fa9a7806c9e447995d6017c6def9894@XCH-RTP-017.cisco.com> <20171116084112.ockgmxnxews7coie@platinum> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Olivier MATZ , Konstantin Ananyev , "dev@dpdk.org" To: "Hanoch Haim (hhaim)" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com (mail-wm0-f66.google.com [74.125.82.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D411B2DE for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 10:32:14 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id b189so8004309wmd.5 for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 01:32:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" > On Nov 16, 2017, at 1:06 PM, Hanoch Haim (hhaim) wrote: > > Understood > > rte_mbuf_refcnt_update_blind() > > should be good., it will take care the RTE_MBUF_REFCNT_ATOMIC > Why guys not to add just __rte_mbuf_refcnt_update() as a wrapper over rte_atomic16_add_return() and use it in inside rte_mbuf_refcnt_update() and rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() as well?