From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F0E6945
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 12:55:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21])
 by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Mar 2016 03:55:06 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,422,1455004800"; d="scan'208";a="945164030"
Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.107])
 by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 31 Mar 2016 03:55:04 -0700
Received: by  (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:55:03 +0025
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:55:03 +0100
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Message-ID: <20160331105503.GA22600@bricha3-MOBL3>
References: <1458044745-32764-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1459351827-3346-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1459351827-3346-2-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <20160330144649.670d66d1@xeon-e3>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160330144649.670d66d1@xeon-e3>
Organization: Intel Shannon Ltd.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] lpm: allocation of an existing object
 should fail
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:55:07 -0000

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:46:49PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:30:24 +0200
> Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c
> > index 4c44cd7..9877a30 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c
> > @@ -182,8 +182,11 @@ rte_lpm6_create(const char *name, int socket_id,
> >  		if (strncmp(name, lpm->name, RTE_LPM6_NAMESIZE) == 0)
> >  			break;
> >  	}
> > -	if (te != NULL)
> > +	if (te != NULL) {
> > +		lpm = NULL;
> > +		rte_errno = EEXIST;
> >  		goto exit;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	/* allocate tailq entry */
> >  
> 
> with older memzone model, objects in huge memory area were never freed.
> That means when application restarts it finds the old LPM and works.
> With your change it would break such an application.

Is all the memory not zeroed on initialization?

/Bruce