Hello Simon,
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Simon Kagstrom <
simon.kagstrom at netinsight.net> wrote:
> Needed to run as non-root but with higher memory allocations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom at netinsight.net>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Faltstrom <johan.faltstrom at netinsight.net>
> ---
> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> index 8fcb1ab..89b867d 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> @@ -851,8 +851,8 @@ eal_check_common_options(struct internal_config
> *internal_cfg)
> return -1;
> }
> if (internal_cfg->no_hugetlbfs &&
> - (mem_parsed || internal_cfg->force_sockets == 1)) {
> - RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Options -m or --"OPT_SOCKET_MEM" cannot
> "
> + (internal_cfg->force_sockets == 1)) {
> + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Option --"OPT_SOCKET_MEM" cannot "
> "be specified together with --"OPT_NO_HUGE"\n");
> return -1;
> }
>
Hum, d?j? vu.
Well, I asked some question last time :
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-March/015867.html
This patch looks good but since I don't use this --no-huge that often, I
would like to know how you tested this.
And please, when resending a patch, it should be marked as vX.
--
David Marchand
