From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D89A00E6 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:20:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62BA51BDF7; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:20:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6745D1BDEA; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 12:20:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E672521903; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 06:20:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 05 Aug 2019 06:20:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=aT1SnKBs1MYYJe1cJUX+VIFGKA7xPg7zV4k1f9fkUyE=; b=dc9xyYGyd7qE WPavIMXrP4H+dSAx7U8B83QIsPuRwaZS0+sHv3ubUrh9+aU+saGxk48VaczeJVdY 4EyG6mbfPIetTgPkyuOwu2JlfxAN3D8hNzbCBI8fOmqwjTVLGswPix/JhlmLlAL9 lvz41l838fwNvAQBWGWdBqYsOOAKfr4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=aT1SnKBs1MYYJe1cJUX+VIFGKA7xPg7zV4k1f9fkU yE=; b=ZBjkWkjR8eF6nILHRzGBLBs1Od5CAI3tT44kER1i9mSiIS+JwXfT9Z8Ov +XLIzWf3bh48rpyetJcoAUg9UffnHzDWTqzV6Szgmkusa9Jqkobuh/hh4+tAkI9s qcuShOdMtHRuSN1oOA/hTXNbjj8hrLMQpR+ltA1dn+Fa16GadQjM9yh3ZPaaTVKN N5qefhC7BLba7AqQmptizbyExZJVqeINRxvvGvMnHT2Ghn+IYCSO+d02qiFJlX22 07GFMVLq7NxIIVorAfLNBxqIhNRpdtnIghgYGfZDhOZ75mIutYOQCT6waijqh8wX sI/5eyjDS13rcOqeXEG45VaUMNc8g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddruddtjedgvdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CD614380088; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 06:19:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: David Marchand Cc: stable@dpdk.org, dev , Aaron Conole , Michael Santana Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 12:19:58 +0200 Message-ID: <2597822.7cOrOIsT96@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1564662465-2925-1-git-send-email-david.marchand@redhat.com> <2288744.0SrN437FYt@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] test/eal: do not scan PCI devices for memory tests X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 03/08/2019 11:51, David Marchand: > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:57 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > > 01/08/2019 14:27, David Marchand: > > > The memory tests currently check that, for normal mode (not legacy mode), > > > there is no memory left behind when exiting. > > > > I think this is the real bug: > > we are checking a behaviour that we cannot achieve currently. > > > > > The problem is that if a ethdev port is allocated when scanning pci > > > devices (even if the driver probe fails like when you have a virtio > > > management interface attached to the kernel), on exit, dpdk won't free > > > the associated memory since ethdev never frees the ethdev memzone. > > > > As you said in this thread, we could think about how to free it properly > > in a future release. > > For 19.08, I would suggest to disable the test with a comment > > explaining the reason. > > For 19.08, as long as we test shared builds in the CI, then it just > "works", because the net drivers are not loaded. > No net driver, no ethdev leak ;-) So we keep the bug with the unit test not running with a static build for 19.08, and we'll try to fix it in 19.11?