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 26A28A0528; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:37:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 752BC1D934; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:37:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39EE31D92A for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:37:38 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594474655; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=B7lc7llmPiNkMtVXn6WvrV2i3i6z3O6DSUxEPehvEoY=; b=jR9uSvztaKSw8FtwzfP+hwlI6THUa6cDQ7KwdD/de0gdtmEAV2YPZumRgycIeC8NmzMNro 5qK70n103vDg0IHmNwmAFZcuzUw8ocCvFbd8pcZ2FD2WQwPvRoGN3UrDD0HjS7Ad2D6Dpq TU9E7w/p4pzOBYpH4oef2q/4r0c7U80= Received: from mail-ua1-f70.google.com (mail-ua1-f70.google.com [209.85.222.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-500--qrmviEYNkipb_i2ykT4Dw-1; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 09:37:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: -qrmviEYNkipb_i2ykT4Dw-1 Received: by mail-ua1-f70.google.com with SMTP id f89so3875779uaf.18 for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 06:37:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=B7lc7llmPiNkMtVXn6WvrV2i3i6z3O6DSUxEPehvEoY=; b=Yksi+F/V+CB+FWUIIRyOZC4EQX8Mv3OyEFZVYMBRq3gKDcmk6tmzmEqrYocSBoiW3C dwac3ba4Oy9o05SBcaAff69WOk19ntiFrd6BkrlVaN0XoYy4fK5ov0UssNe8ZswC0Hm5 DwPr8z/j9mqZ9eoKCsHMMRjjhYuulnCkF7oVxTU8bKju9xMeyxNlblsu8CvlzDxpJEX8 3R0uTY63WE705J3LLM9PNFnyGYfC16ASuRw3hdj8FrLfo0+WEqKpkDXexBTzCOhBk4KY REbrJjiZHCF45pzekm8BWoCY14Gf5JZs6EQ4GifvlvjQTrNFjsF2/uqjIyIMBWupq/Wx LksA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533di0KhACWB7/fF3baTavxSuDRekvEQKrXppu9dtGWl3pr5U3q5 +1kBDGAYdFoVXoKEvU3kdEVB6uysmOkvtKVMfY3RhsyAHfm7AoM5LJiMylOwX/dqkmejHvkLtyV Pr9JB3k+TILpib7mPato= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:6950:: with SMTP id c16mr22491313uas.53.1594474646374; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 06:37:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHgxTCiPtwhbwXVZOyV79Y48k/dTTEUOVbH3oXlHOBzFp88s/ScNM5zZ3baY6Sp9KywgNlCNBbp7f/pFWMjpI= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:6950:: with SMTP id c16mr22491293uas.53.1594474646113; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 06:37:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200711074131.47134-1-ruifeng.wang@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20200711074131.47134-1-ruifeng.wang@arm.com> From: David Marchand Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 15:37:15 +0200 Message-ID: To: Ruifeng Wang Cc: Bruce Richardson , Vladimir Medvedkin , dev , nd , Honnappa Nagarahalli X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] lpm: do not return defer queue handle to the user 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 Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 9:42 AM Ruifeng Wang wrote: > > There is no need to return defer queue handle in rte_lpm_rcu_qsbr_add API, > since enough flexibility has been provided to configure the defer queue. > > Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang > Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli > --- > This is a followup patch of LPM RCU reclamation series [1]. > [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/cover/73673/ Applied, thanks Ruifeng. -- David Marchand