From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37410A3160 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:54:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748001E54A; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:54:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f193.google.com (mail-pf1-f193.google.com [209.85.210.193]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 666011E545 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:54:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f193.google.com with SMTP id h195so2584006pfe.5 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 15:54:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TOz7emXJ686IgCVvpqef98WfspOR23mbWTiHe2XFk0w=; b=d2soZ33Q5TfGSaTpGyVcWLE23nogJq3T95D7w/V/0zIjPepR+3Ij5xwWoNM3gD9hpV TBjGcte35SXXqospIRj+Oys6j/NSi/KKr6JvlNemd3da0u4Ty2VT3mc9RRG0po66Fxf5 AMILfuUEt0Nr08jZOuBbLlkHoBBF2eArF7dWD/hgfoMIO8LpV7XFp7hFUmYrVJCm11Hf wq4DrrHGOtN1CWGVu/cDA6ZxIivUlxZWxlFkt49I+Nz7wgh4WEFs6vmGjSkxbP9h3NA5 M4+k6R7iiqVKMZ1iMvl9FNC3g1Ow+zZ3E0JCbCXCRDlUJ/OQKBqLQIIwTaGufyZEDahz h6LA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TOz7emXJ686IgCVvpqef98WfspOR23mbWTiHe2XFk0w=; b=HYQ6UEp2qCBOnDZ5E5Wqh6bLhYuIseCUNy6C9C2gsf0XESKMs0ISAjvaNsHqgSz9o0 95jFUVTPTiJ3BgEWUIqL/lyoQ6lNG/wlzLmywP/0b3LIL5pXNk3wNCsBh5MCO8Ys7q+B bq/Swj9DmQWqcMz05WjBJssuMUN8yOqSptkGFeJ7zFiXnXV4N9w3HO2QyQaRaV8SxDLU kBYnck2CS/i3C/y5ln+WnSCLgeMHqMY2ok4nDcsg6XO88l3VCw3osIf+QfMZGPK4lrT8 Iq4Vt3AWrunOQDU97lfeVjJRXqSBzbq4P1dNFpZLUCdWR4zLtyUFSxw6MSv9EiX4L6bH n/fg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVg223wREZiocCOgQrng42zg3YRd52Efld4+LnjfZOntjpv+5Ar SIqM2F+fFKYtAgRTOTtYkdYBEw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqybmqgZjp51NNyYCqiACBc3e8pYB8Ix8S4+T22CjkoIM7Lc5bZnPr91IuP5QqvTIdtK0P+dgA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bb0a:: with SMTP id u10mr7241227pjr.14.1570661689084; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 15:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.lan (204-195-22-127.wavecable.com. [204.195.22.127]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c6sm3735204pgk.65.2019.10.09.15.54.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 09 Oct 2019 15:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 15:54:41 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Morten =?UTF-8?B?QnLDuHJ1cA==?= Cc: olivier.matz@6wind.com, harry.van.haaren@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20191009155441.5ecd1ae0@hermes.lan> In-Reply-To: <20191009135511.84547-2-mb@smartsharesystems.com> References: <20191009135511.84547-1-mb@smartsharesystems.com> <20191009135511.84547-2-mb@smartsharesystems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/1] mbuf: add bulk free function 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:55:11 +0000 Morten Br=C3=B8rup wrote: > =20 > +/** > + * @internal helper function for freeing a bulk of packet mbuf segments > + * via an array holding the packet mbuf segments from the same mempool > + * pending to be freed. > + * > + * @param m > + * The packet mbuf segment to be freed. > + * @param pending > + * Pointer to the array of packet mbuf segments pending to be freed. > + * @param nb_pending > + * Pointer to the number of elements held in the array. > + * @param pending_sz > + * Number of elements the array can hold. > + * Note: The compiler should optimize this parameter away when using a > + * constant value, such as RTE_PKTMBUF_FREE_PENDING_SZ. > + */ > +static __rte_always_inline void > +__rte_pktmbuf_free_seg_via_array(struct rte_mbuf *m, Overall the patch looks good, but don't think always_inline is required here. That should be reserved for things that use inline assembly or other stuff that would be broken if it wasn't inlined. Most compilers would inline it without any modifier anyway.