From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F7E19F5; Mon, 17 Sep 2018 11:50:07 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Sep 2018 02:50:06 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.53,384,1531810800"; d="scan'208";a="84149596" Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.55]) ([10.237.220.55]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Sep 2018 02:49:49 -0700 To: Maxime Coquelin , dev@dpdk.org Cc: tiwei.bie@intel.com, ray.kinsella@intel.com, zhihong.wang@intel.com, kuralamudhan.ramakrishnan@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org References: From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <5ccd5ac1-e01a-2416-035b-d7b3bb2d7a07@intel.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 10:49:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/9] eal: don't allow legacy mode with in-memory mode 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 09:50:08 -0000 On 13-Sep-18 2:06 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote: > > > On 09/04/2018 05:15 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote: >> In-memory mode was never meant to support legacy mode, because we >> cannot sort anonymous pages anyway. >> >> Fixes: 72b49ff623c4 ("mem: support --in-memory mode") >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov >> --- >>   lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 6 ++++++ >>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c >> b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c >> index dd5f97402..873099acc 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c >> @@ -1390,6 +1390,12 @@ eal_check_common_options(struct internal_config >> *internal_cfg) >>               "--"OPT_HUGE_UNLINK"\n"); >>           return -1; >>       } >> +    if (internal_cfg->legacy_mem && >> +            internal_cfg->in_memory) { >> +        RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Option --"OPT_LEGACY_MEM" is not compatible " >> +                "with --"OPT_IN_MEMORY"\n"); > > This is a general comment, as it is consistent with the style of the > file. I generally prefer not splitting error strings into multiple lines > even if it is longer than 80 chars, because it makes grepping for the > error string more difficult. I agree in general, however in this particular case the string is ungreppable (it is a word now!) anyway because it's split into a few pieces. > >> +        return -1; >> +    } >>       return 0; >>   } >> > > Other than that: > Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin > > Thanks, > Maxime > -- Thanks, Anatoly