Hi, I'm done comparing our two patches and just submitted a v3 of my series based on that. I found even more use after free and leaks than we had before. Patch series has grown to 5 patches now.
At least my gmail groups subsequent git send-email posts weirdly, let me know if you are in any trouble reviewing applying them. Christian Ehrhardt Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Christian Ehrhardt < christian.ehrhardt at canonical.com> wrote: > Thanks Oliver, the bad thing was that I forgot to CC dpdk-dev last friday. > I just resubmitted correcting that mistake. > > I think it should now just be down to the re-review and apply of Bruce. > > Christian Ehrhardt > Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server > Canonical Ltd > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz at 6wind.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 03/15/2016 01:25 PM, Olivier Matz wrote: >> >>> Internal lpm structures are not properly freed. Seen with the >>> lpm6 autotest. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz at 6wind.com> >>> --- >>> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 3 +++ >>> lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c | 1 + >>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+) >>> >>> >> Self-nack, Christian already submitted a series about it: >> >> http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11543/ >> http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11544/ >> http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11545/ >> >> >