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 DC663A051A; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 03:03:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5DD82862; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 03:03:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223C91B53; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 03:03:18 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: QfruvdIBgyYiAcguVon4Guv6ngaHO9FGd6cX2GTiOr1qi1cUu0KdmiWrviCBZkJ1mcNtUCgclY CRGiGHCApt6Q== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Jun 2020 18:03:18 -0700 IronPort-SDR: jRgP5CBRErwO/0KZadKUegaodNbZioljeJEwmQucL1yoQB+CpW4LfsGLBTKnbr6eYuueVQzPAY f5Fi+PyrqV/g== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,494,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="306371952" Received: from yexl-server.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.67.116.183]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Jun 2020 18:03:15 -0700 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:54:53 +0800 From: Ye Xiaolong To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Olivier Matz , Konstantin Ananyev , Thomas Monjalon , dev@dpdk.org, haiyue.wang@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20200610005453.GC7842@intel.com> References: <20200609052955.59196-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20200609071729.GP12564@platinum> <20200609071533.GB7842@intel.com> <20200609082945.527e6c59@hermes.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200609082945.527e6c59@hermes.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: remove unused next member 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 06/09, Stephen Hemminger wrote: >On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 15:15:33 +0800 >Ye Xiaolong wrote: > >> On 06/09, Olivier Matz wrote: >> >Hi Xialong, >> > >> >On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 01:29:55PM +0800, Xiaolong Ye wrote: >> >> TAILQ_ENTRY next is not needed in struct mbuf_dynfield_elt and >> >> mbuf_dynflag_elt, since they are actually chained by rte_tailq_entry's >> >> next field when calling TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(mbuf_dynfield/dynflag_list, te, >> >> next). >> >> >> >> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags") >> >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Xiaolong Ye >> > >> >Good catch, I forgot to remove this field which was used in former >> >implementations. Thanks! >> > >> >I suggest to update the title to highlight it's about dynamic mbuf: >> > mbuf: remove unused next member in dyn flag/field >> > >> >Apart from this: >> >Acked-by: Olivier Matz >> >> Thanks for the ack, I'll submit V2 with suggested subject. >> >> Thanks, >> Xiaolong > >Is the field visible in ABI? I don't think so, the touched structs in this patch mbuf_dynfield_elt and mbuf_dynflag_elt are internal structures used in rte_mbuf_dyn.c, and structures exposed to user are struct rte_mbuf_dynfield and rte_mbuf_dynflag in rte_mbuf_dyn.h, and they still keep the same as before, so there should be no ABI break in this patch. Thanks, Xiaolong