From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943252BDB for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:06:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Aug 2016 09:06:45 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,461,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="1028417273" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.42]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 02 Aug 2016 09:04:12 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 02 Aug 2016 17:04:11 +0025 Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 17:04:10 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Wei Dai Cc: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20160802160410.GC17728@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1470059264-29772-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> <1470103765-18226-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1470103765-18226-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] lpm: remove redundant check when adding lpm rule X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 16:06:47 -0000 On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 10:09:25AM +0800, Wei Dai wrote: > When a rule with depth > 24 is added into an existing > rule with depth <=24, a new tbl8 is allocated, the existing > rule first fulfill whole new tbl8, so the filed vaild of typo "valid" > each entry in this tbl8 is always true and depth of each > entry is always < 24 before adding new rule with depth > 24. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Dai Acked-by: Bruce Richardson Having to make this change twice shows up the fact that we are still carrying around some version changes for older releases. Given that we are now past the 16.07 release, the old code can probably be removed. Any volunteers to maybe do up a patch for that. Regards, /Bruce