> On Nov 16, 2017, at 1:06 PM, Hanoch Haim (hhaim) <hh...@cisco.com> wrote: > > Understood > > rte_mbuf_refcnt_update_blind() > > should be good., it will take care the RTE_MBUF_REFCNT_ATOMIC >
Why guys not to add just __rte_mbuf_refcnt_update() as a wrapper over rte_atomic16_add_return() and use it in inside rte_mbuf_refcnt_update() and rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() as well?
