> On Aug 8, 2016, at 3:10 PM, Jan Scheurich wrote:
>
> Hi Jarno,
>
> While trying to rebase my "dpcls per in_port" patch to your updated
> pvector/cpvector implementation, I have stumbled over a threading issue in
> your patch.
>
> I believe that dpcls_destroy_subtable(), which may be invoke
;dpcls per in_port with sorted subtables"
patch.
BR, Jan
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@openvswitch.org] On Behalf Of Jarno
> Rajahalme
> Sent: Wednesday, 06 July, 2016 14:26
> To: dev@openvswitch.org
> Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] pvector
> On Jul 22, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 05:26:17AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
>> PMD threads use pvectors but do not need the overhead of the
>> concurrent version. Expose the non-concurrent version for
>> that use.
>>
>> Note that struct pvector is renam
On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 05:26:17AM -0700, Jarno Rajahalme wrote:
> PMD threads use pvectors but do not need the overhead of the
> concurrent version. Expose the non-concurrent version for
> that use.
>
> Note that struct pvector is renamed as struct cpvector (for concurrent
> priority vector), an
PMD threads use pvectors but do not need the overhead of the
concurrent version. Expose the non-concurrent version for
that use.
Note that struct pvector is renamed as struct cpvector (for concurrent
priority vector), and the former struct pvector_impl is now struct
pvector.
Signed-off-by: Jarno
