Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] timer: allow first subsystem init from secondary

["Carrillo, Erik G" <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 3:13 PM
> To: Carrillo, Erik G <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
> Cc: Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; rsanford@akamai.com;
> dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] timer: allow first subsystem init from secondary
> 
> 09/05/2019 22:08, Carrillo, Erik G:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > > 09/05/2019 21:39, Erik Gabriel Carrillo:
> > > > Since memzones can be reserved from secondary processes as well as
> > > > primary processes, if the first call to the timer subsystem init
> > > > function occurs in a secondary process, we should allow it to succeed.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: c0749f7096c7 ("timer: allow management in shared memory")
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Erik Gabriel Carrillo <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
> > >
> > > I think this patch is too big for -rc4.
> > > And it doesn't look so critical.
> > > Do you agree to wait 19.08?
> > >
> >
> > The very last hunk of the patch should at least be applied, as it fixes an
> issue in the finalize() function.  The rest of it is just to make sure the behavior
> is the same as the prior release with respect to the secondary.
> >
> > I'd prefer if the whole patch was applied, but I can break out the last hunk
> for a very small patch if that's what you think we should do.
> 
> It's a pity it comes so late.
> 
> Can you tell how much you think it won't bring any regression?
> Are you available everyday until Monday to fix it quickly if something goes
> wrong?
> 
I'm fairly sure there won't be a regression; I just did some more testing on the secondary side.  But I will be available to fix it if something does go wrong.

Thanks,
Erik