From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173AC10B7 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 10:43:47 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Feb 2018 01:43:47 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,405,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="178693091" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.78]) ([10.237.220.78]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Feb 2018 01:43:46 -0800 To: "Tan, Jianfeng" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <31f6d9ef676fb1eb0a664c06d62d66f32876dcb6.1519672713.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <3f4fab71b0d17fb9d0b15e3634f4fe7d12dd3e92.1519740527.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: <7e275a26-c30d-4bf7-d56d-f8e757a902ce@intel.com> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 09:43:45 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/5] eal: add internal flag indicating init has completed 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: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 09:43:49 -0000 On 28-Feb-18 2:12 AM, Tan, Jianfeng wrote: > Hi Anatoly, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Burakov, Anatoly >> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:36 PM >> To: dev@dpdk.org >> Cc: Tan, Jianfeng >> Subject: [PATCH v3 1/5] eal: add internal flag indicating init has completed >> >> Currently, primary process initialization is finalized by setting >> the RTE_MAGIC value in the shared config. However, it is not >> possible to check whether secondary process initialization has >> completed. Add such a value to internal config. > > A nit: > "check whether secondary process initialization has completed" sounds like checking comes from another process. > Does it look better, "check whether initialization has completed in secondary process"? > >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov > > Reviewed-by: Jianfeng Tan > > Thanks, > Jianfeng You're probably right, i should reword that. Thanks! -- Thanks, Anatoly