On 12/14/2017 04:36 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 04:06:26PM +0000, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
From: "Artem V. Andreev" <artem.andr...@oktetlabs.ru>
Primarily, it is intended as a way for the mempool driver to provide
additional information on how it lays up objects inside the mempool.
Signed-off-by: Artem V. Andreev <artem.andr...@oktetlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>
---
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool_ops.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
index 721227f..3c59d36 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.h
@@ -217,6 +217,11 @@ struct rte_mempool_memhdr {
void *opaque; /**< Argument passed to the free callback */
};
+/*
+ * Additional information about the mempool
+ */
+struct rte_mempool_info;
+
While there is no compilation issue, I find a bit strange to define this
API without defining the content of rte_mempool_info.
Agree. Mainly it was an attempt to fit required way to store objects in
memory
into existing approach. I agree that it is significantly better to solve
it in
the different way as you suggested. So, the patch will go away.
