From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D7E8D97 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:10:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A38DC219AA; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:10:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:10:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=e/Rb/8qckpFQ1kQcvaLmYV28aF +Cyib30E73SFrSnxQ=; b=Lod3RgFJMx0qLLadHpFM0S4lVCfdc9X/6hH4tSUMmR ZTiH2cRHc+/tIJpToOElZwY6FLt5No4wsfDA28SFR97whhrSRwSghFG3mnIlV8Jg ScZaQpbEDAx6vtXKegLh+3E32LdrikDFkgCC9xxRhoinFyWY5W7ERNQ916Y7xiyr A= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=e/Rb/8 qckpFQ1kQcvaLmYV28aF+Cyib30E73SFrSnxQ=; b=XhTN0ei6FyZwi0XV3WL4cn qLxZLEYkaV98YJR3x1wGwnUVurFyuy7VujlpQ/R4XKNKc4FliC3OD/OZ4jubeWOw sgR0bFSpWcM+YFaB/gr5t1sAx1DI8Tj+7RA8eJqLpMAfvoGLZt5NKGA2vchVvJdg mILiNtvhsiP23rfoebcpARBmtZBdU2QNYLCguQvjgrbc48VX2NnEVulP6oRzy4VM XEwYq2nFJtO8c0LvyWXKF7PjBbxUsIS6AzMshfu/Sxko0X7Um4eoo+R4QRBH6TXw y2EGG+IodPuTnKIepwKIG1kxesrX54lb7OAdwi+Z92IpsneeHE/Mhr9PRPHcD+nw == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6E58CE4120; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 12:10:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Andrew Rybchenko Cc: Yongseok Koh , wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, jingjing.wu@intel.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com, dev@dpdk.org, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com, nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:10:36 +0200 Message-ID: <1854520.Legm0nyyME@xps> In-Reply-To: <1a65f081-4c92-78d5-b00c-08e66fdef5c8@solarflare.com> References: <20180310012532.15809-1-yskoh@mellanox.com> <20180426011010.28078-1-yskoh@mellanox.com> <1a65f081-4c92-78d5-b00c-08e66fdef5c8@solarflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] mbuf: support attaching external buffer to mbuf X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:10:39 -0000 26/04/2018 18:05, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 04/26/2018 04:10 AM, Yongseok Koh wrote: > > -#define RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(mb) ((mb)->ol_flags & IND_ATTACHED_MBUF) > > +#define RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(mb) RTE_MBUF_CLONED(mb) > > We have discussed that it would be good to deprecate RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT() > since it is not !RTE_MBUF_DIREC(). Is it lost here or intentional (may > be I've lost > in the thread)? I think it should be a separate deprecation notice.