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 CD0A8A04B6; Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:05:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D98137AF; Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:05:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A99592C6A for ; Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:05:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC00422693; Sun, 24 Nov 2019 13:05:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 24 Nov 2019 13:05:06 -0500 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=hMh1HsSLGGDGe7jth2ieUL6WHLuuzWUcXN8hC54a8JM=; b=eL6zTBm42HyH t6aAtXL8XXZOjAsAazxr+79RYpzC8IvGyTTltzJNnqSJjeOloJ3QPnBWoyGfMqHF 6Ox8mE+OzCSnXMYuQ7LIAslIbSr0qPlWsNciJlTKDwW+ofUztQ15xt6N7z0zDfmz JsZsOSovjjEGYVsRF7I+Xwg8NrY2vuU= 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=fm1; bh=hMh1HsSLGGDGe7jth2ieUL6WHLuuzWUcXN8hC54a8 JM=; b=u3AiJrtSWpi0hUSbHVR1PYCf21AHTP+5kXWUa4b4yA4LShbGTsxQJAbwk 9vNNaA19wpRIUGOI1mf6K+zxovtCOOcYIf/eYBSXNtokYXTsOrF2D1fS9eG4LVDn pabfsCqjl4RUI9TiaoIfvQvvn6JuBlRNqz0Bq7VbbIjQZ4Sjb042t5301y8jq1qU 7BpTxU3JB8Avt6mC0nq46uoNts6vXNGQlN1zDE8ALrd/zP3VU6zgIN7Ob/TPBsEH L3c0+eiKBNHn/hQ6EtGPYmo8YPkvN6+UU3cRPw+zrVofQ8dCZpUTBAj1ERuzvq4e vW62KOPhHSLhxOXYw7jrD9uV6lbEg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudehkedguddutdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc fkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpeht hhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd 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 A48FC80059; Sun, 24 Nov 2019 13:05:05 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: Shahaf Shuler , "dev@dpdk.org" , "olivier.matz@6wind.com" Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:05:03 +0100 Message-ID: <2629536.neMm6mQGvd@xps> In-Reply-To: <20191124095016.7a5fe320@hermes.lan> References: <20191121122810.147351-1-shahafs@mellanox.com> <20191124055336.129527-1-shahafs@mellanox.com> <20191124095016.7a5fe320@hermes.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] mbuf: extend pktmbuf pool private structure 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" Archived-At: List-Archive: 24/11/2019 18:50, Stephen Hemminger: > On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 05:53:46 +0000 > Shahaf Shuler wrote: > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > > index 35df1c4c38..8fa7f49645 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c > > @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ rte_pktmbuf_pool_init(struct rte_mempool *mp, void *opaque_arg) > > /* if no structure is provided, assume no mbuf private area */ > > user_mbp_priv = opaque_arg; > > if (user_mbp_priv == NULL) { > > - default_mbp_priv.mbuf_priv_size = 0; > > + memset(&default_mbp_priv, 0, sizeof(default_mbp_priv)); > > An alternative would be to use structure initialization. > > struct rte_pktmbuf_pool_private default_mbp_priv = { }; I think we used to have issues with such structure initialization. If I remember well, icc was not always happy with such construct... memset is safe