From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3935A0C4C; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:37:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D4440042; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:37:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E6BD40041 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:37:36 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1634204255; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Vo+W/H2E7/tgLtlTGgbWxcFMEu/FHYYl2IA4cR4y0go=; b=jKV0x1+4R5lDGbMI6BHMWhncxZ5UjU4YgjPa4CzWZmxyvvp4R5tZCz4YgdsMXMkuzGDyCE QNp+xX/lU/Lnnxalaq0ZEmU2USo1rmuQhMavo92czOnyqn5fAoC41/3+4d7eU11MnDZ/40 bg/bgIdvb+XroyWSlAthRBfSmnAoz8Q= Received: from mail-lf1-f72.google.com (mail-lf1-f72.google.com [209.85.167.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-15-i0UaDF2QO5mmHe_G55ns2g-1; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 05:37:34 -0400 X-MC-Unique: i0UaDF2QO5mmHe_G55ns2g-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f72.google.com with SMTP id z18-20020a0565120c1200b003fd76d7ca21so1228481lfu.13 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:37:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Vo+W/H2E7/tgLtlTGgbWxcFMEu/FHYYl2IA4cR4y0go=; b=sksfsL8O6uh2DCuYFdslrOIgNm5rhOptz3u0o/JqByoPA9L8OofXz1rTEDZ4FvdT2C WAp9WJRNe+SKAltWiWGTHv7kiXjhMOUH9rqoguTBavqYxnGhLMNnLxU/EJForGuSHztv Cx2cKO0Da5LLObzvtidu97rMTnr7X9JYii656yPQKosbQPY8bd8gkXSYjMF5SxC0t2ng qY8ogFmOVJ/kZUtbaTRCmA35N0UTrrJ7M27D85UzkchaJyoBJgERJWcuzwsvFwhLEpEz wOqlsDz1kjrHY4JN+X1fSuBxkE1UHg+sQpKikNCZTpXyZiIvvc78zC2kpf+uGhNpVp7F dSIw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530TdidFuyBHfx4X4rJbPZ14vrXPDOajZqzRvoyQt5V4YONm7I9K xgV96dLTiqfZ7kf2Ymgsnvi2/hWPvgurDrMjDTHDRSJBxV3fBIXD6+J7YaJY/VsbJGQscfF+pNn GKkpUDrPfdWh643vV3L0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a8e:: with SMTP id m14mr4048602lfu.575.1634204252930; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:37:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyfKDmTxJrIRqdNzMBZPNiEDvvL5wz8daHU3z2/ONL8EIY1G5ywkMTvNk6GzhStvmviks3ho5Dmr4XVxI5CejM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a8e:: with SMTP id m14mr4048574lfu.575.1634204252599; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:37:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210826145726.102081-1-hkalra@marvell.com> <24392547.dnzkRMgc80@thomas> <10896897.yJauvYxkRq@thomas> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:37:21 +0200 Message-ID: To: Harman Kalra Cc: Thomas Monjalon , "dev@dpdk.org" , Raslan Darawsheh , Ray Kinsella , Dmitry Kozlyuk , "viacheslavo@nvidia.com" , "matan@nvidia.com" Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1 2/7] eal/interrupts: implement get set APIs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 11:31 AM Harman Kalra wrote: > If we are making it automatic detection, shall we now even have argument to this alloc API? > I added a flags argument (32 bit) in latest series where each bit of this flag can be an allocation capability. > I used two bits for discriminating between glibc malloc and rte_malloc. Shall we keep it or drop it? > > David, Dmitry please share your thoughts. I don't have ideas of how we would extend allocations of such object, so I am unsure. In doubt, I would keep this flags field, and validate it's always 0 (as mentioned in my reply on ABI). -- David Marchand