On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Andy Zhou wrote:
> When deleting a mask from the mask array, we always move the last entry
> into its current location. Another approach can be NULL in its current
> place, and periodically compact it.
>
> The approach taken by this patch is more efficient during r
No rush from my point of view, just going through patchwork.
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> I will review it by tomorrow.
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>> This has been sitting in patchwork for a while. I guess that Pravin or
>> Jesse needs to rev
I will review it by tomorrow.
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> This has been sitting in patchwork for a while. I guess that Pravin or
> Jesse needs to review it?
>
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Andy Zhou wrote:
>> When deleting a mask from the mask array, we always move t
This has been sitting in patchwork for a while. I guess that Pravin or
Jesse needs to review it?
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Andy Zhou wrote:
> When deleting a mask from the mask array, we always move the last entry
> into its current location. Another approach can be NULL in its current
> p
When deleting a mask from the mask array, we always move the last entry
into its current location. Another approach can be NULL in its current
place, and periodically compact it.
The approach taken by this patch is more efficient during run time.
During look up, fast path packet don't have to skip
