> > > > > > > > if (likely (rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1) || > > > > > > > > likely (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) > > > > > > > > == 0))
In all the debate about atomics, I don't think anyone got around to pointing out that in the unlikely case that the refcnt is not 1, then it's equally unlikely that decrementing it will result in 0 despite the code's claim to the contrary. That's the part that confused me. Would it make sense to fix this while adding the comment? -don dprovan at bivio.net
