Sure: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-April/036884.html,
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> Hi Mauricio,
>
>
>
> Good points. Would you be willing to prepare a patch to fix these issues?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anatoly
>
>
>
> *From:* Mauricio V?squez [mailto:mauricio.va
Hi Mauricio,
Good points. Would you be willing to prepare a patch to fix these issues?
Thanks,
Anatoly
From: Mauricio V?squez [mailto:mauricio.vasquezber...@studenti.polito.it]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 10:13 AM
To: Burakov, Anatoly
Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio ; Richardso
Hi Anatoly,
Thank you very much, I did not take into account that detail.
I have two additional concerns about it:
1. I think it is possible to have a race condition. The memzone is marked
as not freeable after it has been added to the ivshmem device, then it is
possible to free the memzone just
Dear All,
I was looking at that patch, I can understand its functionality but not its
implementation..
Why to calculate idx?, Just doing "mz->ioremap_addr = mz->phys_addr" would
not be sufficient? After all, the goal is to mark the memzone as used by
ivshmem to forbid freeing it.
Please correct
Hi Mauricio,
You?re not missing anything. It would be done this way, if the memzone
parameter wasn?t const. But it is const, so we have to find the memzone in
config to edit it.
Thanks,
Anatoly
From: Mauricio V?squez [mailto:mauricio.vasquezber...@studenti.polito.it]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30,
5 matches
Mail list logo
