On 3 June 2015 at 20:42, Zoltan Kiss <[email protected]> wrote: > On that note it turned out this will be a lot bigger than I thought ... > And I already have two questions: > > - what should we do if an assert over odp_queue_enq fails? E.g. > "CU_ASSERT(odp_queue_enq(queue, ev) == 0)" Should we free the events, or > just leave it? > If we want the validation program to terminate cleanly, I assume the caller has to free any buffers that weren't enqueued or they will be leaked and then things will go bad when the program is terminating.
> - there are numerous places where you don't know what kind of event you > are actually queue, so should we make an odp_event_free() call?, e.g. > I have also encountered this situation. I even started to write a post to the list about it. But in the end I hacked around it, probably by switching on the event type and calling different free functions. Having an odp_event_free() would be simpler and clearer so I second your suggestion here. -- Ola > odp_schedule_release_atomic > > > > On 03/06/15 18:56, Zoltan Kiss wrote: > >> >> This is bringing up an another issue: we should define the same >> behaviour for odp_queue_enq() and odp_queue_enq_multi(), shouldn't we? >> > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
