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 456E0A0C4B; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:16:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E11E40041; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:16:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F984003C for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:16:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1634239016; 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=ITUTO+7KEPZ7oK6/EAn4WHOYpGkfEP7sEOj3TvQNNrE=; b=aubzlMsY87W5gNhAHjhl7zHZYeRehr+4fHKagLXqqUKbJCgAlmzFhQDS5bhvKcAlk+z+Yp I/PXR21eXIASTcAEO1LlbMZ+E+8/FCr3Dua1T2bqgM9X7oopw5STYeR8TyOgBAfyJZwA8c x2x+PSW5nMu//PMWFp6NmyrCmbVDeWE= Received: from mail-lf1-f71.google.com (mail-lf1-f71.google.com [209.85.167.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-329-F_GLwXqeP66iRFQWxethhQ-1; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 15:16:55 -0400 X-MC-Unique: F_GLwXqeP66iRFQWxethhQ-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f71.google.com with SMTP id br42-20020a056512402a00b003fd94a74905so5059305lfb.7 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 12:16:55 -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=ITUTO+7KEPZ7oK6/EAn4WHOYpGkfEP7sEOj3TvQNNrE=; b=z0yuBqIuvmCbpIOTrbk9Q+dF+liv4lci9zc6T+4vVc2630PP1xfrIAUialyU8pBYqI t62BWicjqiEhs3TbSRQLnJIhGzZoEQXD413pqVsLKkkqPK8musEcgGM3iH7I/8af7qlM ufwUlNEygwKUW/6nlkwHsJ2V5/STGR8ChWpLTFnEpGemJMCmCmDNGvwF8XcweDRNaREI m3FonSZwN2DpZgwOCm4yvcV1G7BwaLZOW61/T9scEObJiQjaWgDqdqY9+aoCO6NdY8xZ HWOuZHtw2z22M0H6EWMnPKTfRgKB4g7U+wcN13UW0Qabj3h9sHcUwjsFkJPFUsxENb2m SK8w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HuluNqXiB/DHHHyjRMZSRKkVte2dEjcr97VqB7yLYlPQj4FXd cQfutRcqmiJXSldh9hBIeLTtOF+zRpNsFrD1Rq2ltH4dKkNrn0eFj324Aa85ikJJOLijLXDSAdP 02MCN7miYcKbY7eEwe7Q= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a8e:: with SMTP id m14mr6782913lfu.575.1634239014123; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 12:16:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwPnqgDjPlgOjkEUqbIjZokEDaqov1X0NDKcltctmZuZvVDKw/ZSIe0JMP33AxljzaqJ/RqvNM/K4XngS7Mh4w= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a8e:: with SMTP id m14mr6782889lfu.575.1634239013947; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 12:16:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211012072848.17741-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 21:16:42 +0200 Message-ID: To: Andrew Rybchenko Cc: dev , Ray Kinsella , Dmitry Kozlyuk , Thomas Monjalon , Olivier Matz , Kevin Traynor , Luca Boccassi , Christian Ehrhardt , "Xueming(Steven) Li" 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] [PATCH] mempool: enforce valid flags at creation 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 Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:57 AM David Marchand wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:49 AM Andrew Rybchenko > wrote: > > > > On 10/12/21 10:28 AM, David Marchand wrote: > > > If we do not enforce valid flags are passed by an application, this > > > application might face issues in the future when we add more flags. > > > > Thanks. I'd even consider it as a bug and the fix to be > > backported. > > I wondered too when writing the patch. > I'd like to hear from others. Backporting risks breaking existing applications which were validated with potentially invalid flags. So I won't mark it for backport. I'll send v2 wrt to your other comment. Thanks Andrew. -- David Marchand