From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F76C2A1A for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:09:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id k125so279028162wma.1 for ; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:09:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GhglPw1CPOAiQFqLum12KJZdLZy/lI+9/KCTYqg8yLw=; b=JhbZPodvE5Y4O7HpDP5X+OZ1UsIYewOCtboW0e2wTpiPq6hwHomIv89N6GCWS04WRN kmVmzXM3hwp+Ij+RqkpV9bEFs0Xtq+S6x5CbpUJ3h/q/P9wvQ0vYZOkkbciqThQZnHXN lSzoQHRicgOzzYDJNgZssC5W6MizRTdbklI5mz/hU0ztlHilLqR47xXL/3JcpN0bdqX+ /3OBTtUdoiFiMW7u0fNFC6JxJ8eGP8/TRkfd+W/H9vHnf92P4J7tAciyapXrT2P3XHsJ NDVOPwC+xG7vq/v24ye0zenoff8gYT31NITF5c2jG48FhHWwAm6vUjNYxtGQ267IN2CP 4wuA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GhglPw1CPOAiQFqLum12KJZdLZy/lI+9/KCTYqg8yLw=; b=gz7eSADXKkSyjTTMQDH6IEHmqOhiy5bBOXYv4p8xO30+rDZqxag67/9QDqKdtyS/B6 lJyVQ90b59ryMehRLrpCVUQJZS+F/0agyJAyAjt/GxJ6SMIqUWLFNITm39ufBr3TPT9E R5k2wXP370Yn3BfxqbxLroVYJ4hBWVCL+ovr5abaLaqDRjDUU012tZ3ftv4yWxC11rIF /V/TTqBw8f0lw803+6hvNTHNilajfsbjGB/ezYxXIBcEMGpJf02jMsZ85jMWxQMhNWuJ W247shVs89XUm2AdJETUra83wtOCBVokh32Fh977gKBW6P2KEyhl2CI4D+i7gDwv/it6 /MDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rm/xrb3EnVSxdPgP1fSIisaZRzZYwgTEJIF5PPdOZQ1cMxEia/xj/uWC98c0LRtl69X X-Received: by 10.28.135.206 with SMTP id j197mr19713034wmd.31.1475687357393; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net. [82.239.227.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id vs7sm9956654wjb.10.2016.10.05.10.09.16 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Oct 2016 10:09:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: jean.tourrilhes@hpe.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, David Marchand , Sergio Gonzalez Monroy , olivier.matz@6wind.com, David Hunt Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 19:09:14 +0200 Message-ID: <7491622.GqnA43pcBO@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20161005164906.GB11912@labs.hpe.com> References: <20160922204637.GA3166@labs.hpe.com> <20161005164906.GB11912@labs.hpe.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] eal: Don't fail secondary if primary is missing tailqs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:09:18 -0000 2016-10-05 09:49, Jean Tourrilhes: > On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:58:01AM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > > I thought you had unaligned binaries. > > You are compiling only one binary ? > > Primary is compiled using the DPDK build process. > Secondary is build using the Snort build process. > Both are pointing to the exact same libdpdk.a. Probably that you would have some aligned builds if Snort was using a pkg-config approach to link DPDK. I cannot commit but I would like to generate some pkg-config files in the DPDK build system to ease linking from external applications. > > I am not sure Sergio is talking about the constructor approach. > > But, this is exactly the cause of the problem. > > > Anyway, the constructors invocation order should not matter. > > For tailq, I agree. For mempool constructors, order do matter. I don't know why such a complex function (rte_mempool_register_ops) is called inside a constructor. Maybe that's the main problem.