Hi Gabriel, Thanks for the clarification.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Carrillo, Erik G > Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2019 8:46 PM > To: Varghese, Vipin <vipin.vargh...@intel.com>; rsanf...@akamai.com > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; techbo...@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Timer library changes > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Varghese, Vipin > > Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 8:39 PM > > To: Carrillo, Erik G <erik.g.carri...@intel.com>; rsanf...@akamai.com > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; techbo...@dpdk.org > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Timer library changes > > > > Hi Erik, > > > > Apologies if I am reaching out a bit late. Please find my query below > > > > <snipped> > > > > This enables primary and secondary processes to modify the same > > > > timer list, which enables some multi-process use cases that were > > > > not previously possible; e.g. a secondary process can start a > > > > timer whose expiration is detected in a primary process running a > > > > new flavor of > > > timer_manage(). > > Does this mean the following, primary can detect the timer expire > > primed by secondary. On calling new timer_manage() from primary will > > it invoke call back handler of secondary? If yes, has this been tested > > with shared library too? > > <snipped> > > Hi Vipin, > > No, with the proposed patch, the callback handler would need to be a function > pointer valid in the same process that is invoking the new timer_manage(). > > Thanks, > Gabriel
