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 90FFCA0517 for ; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:29:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EBB41F1C; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:29:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com (mail-pf1-f195.google.com [209.85.210.195]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D1901AFF for ; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 17:29:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id b5so10221110pfp.9 for ; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 08:29:55 -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=ao5IQzjxHDAY1aUmYMvUyI4mptEUoBOp9Uh59PsMPdY=; b=mvIN+CL5NAp01HQrFIoLVz+TiR+nm0ED2wRE0kPjGkaC7ORCUCEpNwAUpHpZYDokja BoatteELD+sC8mEoLxPHQMkEx4pfHumrcNpuTcmISV71vG/wsdGnMfYVd9pgmz5r/S+a CZKdYJJLaIjg0q+YwpnLA61onXtYGl9BHHHqOdpnihEBfZ0BQAkAn+yHtA041mlDoM41 1kwawjlYGnYzzPNtpUd4qGfthteuDDdFGLc8BqFiJ+oEL9TEm6x3NPD5d0u4hYqOcdjT DEDqHmlKPuPvsWa2MBVwmJgRFqA04dsRw4HLB6nfTDpEFWlWBfjk7zEVAFfdib9/fLqk mVDA== 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=ao5IQzjxHDAY1aUmYMvUyI4mptEUoBOp9Uh59PsMPdY=; b=IvZLuQC5JWbcQUD/Dxkw7xXYyCh2puHDye5/AH0Dseubi100P+Bto2LZbK3sjA8fbR JuLTgtY2OngMzoZlY957wVZho9E/THU3qdCm2nA3gBa1naTZexLZEIsJ62wbe/GsfKLx Lo7tzHKxqDoZlb7Q9N9kOcHP1BrY2OKJ7W9hVpTAMR9ZgZPAvGWGFmsj7422sqBq0DPT owvvsilR9hRX0NRCBW46lwfxaKYcSlFKDp8D4Wwx7biyna8i5GAcMpIl9SQGwkvNxdaE e5g9Fl7mnVhR9Px1JSNj+lxndsLW80rWIAxiaWdtKBA5E0xPjxgWZeEMrZxt+B7pv0Xr WFkw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5331HBWHwGfDbHTTLXD0bUL8YNCdFKi/WJYo91AcifuzupThGE4w 81nJBsrpGOyUQmsYfE/JmQ033g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz1mVscI93OiSdH24mwSmrt5T7LCUu2EkZdSqGnWqJaroEvh5qcJqAtcZfHCyfeL9C97ZN2cw== X-Received: by 2002:a65:6883:: with SMTP id e3mr3621460pgt.5.1591716594300; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 08:29:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.lan (204-195-22-127.wavecable.com. [204.195.22.127]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x126sm10342316pfc.36.2020.06.09.08.29.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 09 Jun 2020 08:29:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 08:29:45 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Ye Xiaolong Cc: Olivier Matz , Konstantin Ananyev , Thomas Monjalon , dev@dpdk.org, haiyue.wang@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20200609082945.527e6c59@hermes.lan> In-Reply-To: <20200609071533.GB7842@intel.com> References: <20200609052955.59196-1-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20200609071729.GP12564@platinum> <20200609071533.GB7842@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: remove unused next member X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" 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?