From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zhe.tao@intel.com>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8875B2BE1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  4 Mar 2016 04:31:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18])
 by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2016 19:31:47 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,534,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="900946475"
Received: from adambynes.sh.intel.com (HELO adambynes) ([10.239.129.240])
 by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Mar 2016 19:31:46 -0800
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 03:17:48 +0800
From: Zhe Tao <zhe.tao@intel.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20160303191032.GA9550@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: [dpdk-dev] i40e & ixgbe xmit issue: txe->next_id
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2016 03:31:51 -0000

Hi all,
I have a question about why we need the txe->next_id field in the i40e&ixgbe Tx
function?
>>From the current implementation, all the txe is initialized and free sequentially,
so we don't need this "next_id" field in our TX function, and when we decide the
"last_id" for txe, we assume the txe is sequential. So I suggest deprecate using
this next_id field.
Any comments will be welcome!