On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:37:38AM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote: > xmem_size and xmem_usage need to know the status of mp->flag. > Following patch will make use of that. > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shu...@caviumnetworks.com> > --- > drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c | 5 +++-- > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 10 ++++++---- > lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 8 ++++++-- > test/test/test_mempool.c | 4 ++-- > 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c > b/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c > index 73e82f808..ee0bda459 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c > +++ b/drivers/net/xenvirt/rte_mempool_gntalloc.c > @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ _create_mempool(const char *name, unsigned elt_num, > unsigned elt_size, > pg_shift = rte_bsf32(pg_sz); > > rte_mempool_calc_obj_size(elt_size, flags, &objsz); > - sz = rte_mempool_xmem_size(elt_num, objsz.total_size, pg_shift); > + sz = rte_mempool_xmem_size(elt_num, objsz.total_size, pg_shift, NULL); > pg_num = sz >> pg_shift; > > pa_arr = calloc(pg_num, sizeof(pa_arr[0]));
What is the meaning of passing NULL to rte_mempool_xmem_size()? Does it mean that flags are ignored? Wouldn't it be better to pass the mempool flags instead of the mempool pointer?
