From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from g4t3426.houston.hpe.com (g4t3426.houston.hpe.com [15.241.140.75]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B022C10 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:39:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from g4t3433.houston.hpecorp.net (g4t3433.houston.hpecorp.net [16.208.49.245]) by g4t3426.houston.hpe.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555D867; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 16:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from postal.labs.hpecorp.net (postal.labs.hpe.com [16.111.35.25]) by g4t3433.houston.hpecorp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D8847; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 16:39:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bougret.labs.hpecorp.net (bougret.labs.hpecorp.net [16.111.8.16]) by postal.labs.hpecorp.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/HPL-PA Hub) with ESMTP id uAIGdZTN008266 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 18 Nov 2016 08:39:37 -0800 Received: from jt by bougret.labs.hpecorp.net with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1c7mCM-000288-UI; Fri, 18 Nov 2016 08:39:35 -0800 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 08:39:34 -0800 From: Jean Tourrilhes To: Olivier Matz , dev@dpdk.org Cc: Thomas Monjalon , David Marchand , Sergio Gonzalez Monroy Message-ID: <20161118163934.GA7779@labs.hpe.com> References: <20161028183705.GA6907@labs.hpe.com> <838c508b-c7d2-7462-6029-e88386e67959@6wind.com> <20161110223241.GA18422@labs.hpe.com> <20161115232722.GA18961@labs.hpe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organisation: HP Labs Palo Alto Address: HP Labs, MS1184, 1501 Page Mill road, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA. E-mail: jean.tourrilhes@hpe.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/1] mempool: Add sanity check when secondary link in less mempools than primary X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: jean.tourrilhes@hpe.com List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 16:39:40 -0000 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 flags for dpdk libraries than in the dpdk > framework. I suppose we need something in the build framework > to provide these flags externally, Good luck integrating that in all foreign build system (I'm looking at you, Snort). > but I don't think we need to patch mempool for that. This sanity check is just that, a sanity check. I don't understand what's bad about a sanity check, it does not change functionality, it does not fix anything and just warn users about those issues. Please look at the patch itself at face value. > Regards, > Olivier Regards, Jean