On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:11 PM, David Marchand <david.marchand at 6wind.com> wrote:
> Hello Santosh, > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla at mvista.com> > wrote: > > iopl() syscall not supported in linux-arm/arm64 so always return 0 value. > > > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <sshukla at mvista.com> > > Acked-by: Jan Viktorin <viktorin at rehivetech.com> > > Suggested-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org> > > I suppose when we will have more arches, this can be rewritten so that > iopl() check is only applied to x86 and all other arches get a 0 > return. > > Thats correct. And which is why I am holding my other patchset which actually move rte_eal_xx_iopl() stuff into arch specifics. I don't wanted to mix two topic in this series. Waiting for this series to get merged then abstract things like, iopl() and move "sys/io.h" in arch specifics and get rid of few ifdef X86 clutter across dpdk code. > How about such commit title ? > "eal/linux: never check iopl for arm" > even better, sending v6 change for this patch now, Thanks! > > > Regards, > -- > David Marchand >
