With both these asserts remove, it's good for me. Nicolas
On 10/05/2015 01:26 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: > On 10/05/15 13:25, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: lng-odp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of EXT >>> Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin >>> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 11:59 AM >>> To: Maxim Uvarov; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCHv3 4/4] validation: packet: test >>> packet reference count >>> >>> >>> >>> On 09/16/2015 09:53 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >>>> + pkt_ref = odp_packet_create_ref(pkt); >>>> + /* Handles should be different */ >>>> + CU_ASSERT(pkt != pkt_ref); >>>> + /* Debug print also should have refcount bits */ >>>> + CU_ASSERT(odp_packet_to_u64(pkt) != >>>> + odp_packet_to_u64(pkt_ref)); >>>> + >>> Isn't this implementation specific ? >>> We replaced a lot of handles with pointers for performance reasons. In that >>> case, both pkt refs would be the same. >>> >>> Nicolas >> Yes, it is. Handle may or may not be the same. Application must not expect >> anything about the handle value. Xxx_u64() is only for printing/logging >> debug information. >> >> -Petri >> > Is that patches good if handles checks will be removed? If you - I will send > updated version. > > Maxim. _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
