From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com (mail-wg0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE6F595B for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 07:46:59 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l18so586835wgh.0 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:56:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=GJWbHWtharmNONqDhEhnYMaPaVMUo4GsF2+g8BmFhlc=; b=xSEciae2XRCu7mMPOd8z6Oyep7xE2zHHipc+CK4uCTPVquOgTOdoX90gnFEe4sBEsH aOuY+aMX99nSeDKnUwjfmNfCbpR0vqG9GBkPo8wRkWrul0GWbHlp4WJ0OvIMogsPubZy RKlO3n1yf8CESq6RNVWzyZXCWGa8gNj1qUrZvnwAZbp6NLfeSfwJhb4iDqO/dwQh6v1l I1K5NRxRkMQhUXC9JCdbOatQoPLKrNqiWzFQQyt1BHnGuR+eFrYmsl+XR2fOMEpAG8Rn rtxQjaczEnakUoJmZINTThI8/wZ4+OJOcmkoynSbD/5F7P68b9IYoMPvSc5S3bGJIgJv xOZA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.52.68 with SMTP id r4mr953549wjo.82.1415861817084; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:56:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.27.86.14 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:56:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1795062.hHiWS5oXJV@xps13> References: <1415630642-3905-1-git-send-email-jigsaw@gmail.com> <1795062.hHiWS5oXJV@xps13> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 08:56:57 +0200 Message-ID: From: jigsaw To: Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] Add in_flight_bitmask so as to use full 32 bits of tag. X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 06:46:59 -0000 Hi Thomas, >>Do you have another commit before this one in your tree? Yes this patch relies on this one: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-November/007943.html Sorry I didn't make it clear. The new field usr in rte_mbuf was under same cover letter in v2 of the in_flight_bitmask patch. Then in_flight_bitmask has a v3 patch, but I didn't include the rte_mbuf in the same cover letter, coz the usr patch has been ACKed. thx & rgds, -ql On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hi, > > 2014-11-10 16:44, Qinglai Xiao: > > With introduction of in_flight_bitmask, the whole 32 bits of tag can be > > used. Further more, this patch fixed the integer overflow when finding > > the matched tags. > > The maximum number workers is now defined as 64, which is length of > > double-word. The link between number of workers and RTE_MAX_LCORE is > > now removed. Compile time check is added to ensure the > > RTE_DISTRIB_MAX_WORKERS is less than or equal to size of double-word. > > > > Signed-off-by: Qinglai Xiao > > The patch doesn't apply cleanly and fail to compile: > lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c:310:27: error: =E2=80=98union > =E2=80=99 has no member named =E2=80=98usr=E2=80=99 > > Do you have another commit before this one in your tree? > > -- > Thomas >