d-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
---
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 19 +++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
index 2e28e2e..82260cc 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
+++ b/lib/librte_me
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c| 14 +++---
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c | 16
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
index 3fb2188..f6907f5 100644
--- a/l
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c| 14 +++---
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c | 16
2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c
index 3fb2188..5df9f6a 100644
--- a/l
Hi,
Expecting static constructors to match between the primary and
the secondary is ill advised and putting yourself at the mercy of the
linker magic. In this case, both primary and secondary were compiled
using the same DPDK directory and exact same libdpdk.a.
Config :
--
CON
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c | 15 ---
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c
b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c
index bb08ec8..6960d06 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c
+++ b/
igned-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
---
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 23 +++
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
index e94e56f..bbb6723 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
+++ b/lib/librte_me
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 04:11:12PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
>
> Do you mind if we put back this conversation on the ML?
Oh, I forgot to do it ? I intended to. Bummer. Please do so.
> I think your example shows that there is no linker magic: you just
> need the same linker
t issues.
SOrry about that, I casually read the page on
http://dpdk.org/dev, but obviously I need to look at it again.
> On 21/09/2016 22:10, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> >@@ -263,9 +264,16 @@ rte_eal_config_reattach(void)
> > mem_config = (struct rte_mem_config *) mmap(r
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 02:25:40PM +0100, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
> NIT but any reason you moved the check before closing the file descriptor?
> (not that it matters with current code as we panic anyway)
>
> Thanks,
> Sergio
More details, as I admit I was terse
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 04:15:11PM +, Mcnamara, John wrote:
>
> The longer more detailed version is here: "Contributing Code to DPDK":
>
> http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/patches.html
>
> John
Thanks a lot. I'll try to find time to look at it.
Jean
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 02:11:39PM +0100, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
> As with your other patch, commit title needs fixing and also missing
> Signed-off-by line.
I'll do that, no worries...
> I might be missing something here so bear with me.
Yes, I know I was te
error
for secondary that I feel this error message should be unambiguous and
helpful.
The call to close was also moved because close() may override errno.
Signed-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
---
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c| 14 +++---
lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 11:51:48AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>
> Applied, thanks
> A rebase was necessary because of this patch: http://dpdk.org/commit/c00ae961
> Please check everything is OK.
Tested today's master. Working as expected.
Thanks !
Jean
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:58:01AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> Hello,
Hi there,
> I thought you had unaligned binaries.
> You are compiling only one binary ?
Primary is compiled using the DPDK build process.
Secondary is build using the Snort build process.
Bot
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:09:14PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>
> Probably that you would have some aligned builds if Snort was using
> a pkg-config approach to link DPDK.
I seriously doubt it, but maybe there is some deep linker
magic that would pick the appropriate set of constructor
secondary to run.
Signed-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
---
lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c | 18 ++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c
b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_tailqs.c
index bb08ec8..cf5a771
might not initialise any mempools at all. This would result
in an obscure segfault when trying to use the mempool. Instead, fail
early with a more explicit error message.
Signed-off-by: Jean Tourrilhes
---
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 10 ++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 10:23:31AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi Jean,
>
> I'm not really fan of this. I think the configuration and build system
> of primary and secondaries should be the same to avoid this kind of
> issues.
You are not going to convert all existing applications to the
18 matches
Mail list logo
