Hi Thomas, > > > > > > Looking at your special case, if the user did set an isolcpus option > > > for another use, with no -c/-l, I understand the dpdk application > > > won't care too much about it. > > > So, this seems like somehow rude to the rest of the system and > unwanted. > > > > The case you mentioned above is not the case I mean. But you make your > > point about this one. > > The case I originally mean: user sets an isolcpus option for DPDK > > applications. Originally, DPDK apps would be started without any > > problem. But for now, fail to start them because the required cores are > > excluded before -c/-l. As per your comments following, we can add a > > warning message (or should we quit on this situation?). But it indeed > > has an effect on old users (they should changed to use "taskset > > ./dpdk_app ..."). Do you think it's a problem? > > There is no activity on this patch. > Jianfeng, do not hesitate to ping if needed. > Should we class this patch as "changes requested"?
Yes, according to latest comments, it should be classified as "changes requested" (I've done that). I'll resent a new version. Thanks, Jianfeng
