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 864BDA0A02; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:17:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 713E7140D73; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:17:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85A9540147 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:17:01 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1616681821; 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=pu5Kn45VlQ7VEXpR6dmno1fwnIDJRY3snSdwPz/mQTk=; b=Oj1QAPNBzU7dz9fRg2bC3BsK87hzoOFk27rE5gbUP/xcIl3pCA3qw8CCRowavRVouy6Yej Vys7E23fLP+/1UDj/U+Zctliy7zQvvagbpfPpxXh9jYE8Z06BRdnR7ZvYSr8OwIMYJSzFk PfD3qowRbyy4hl/PMLmjfvy167gJcts= Received: from mail-vk1-f197.google.com (mail-vk1-f197.google.com [209.85.221.197]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-140-GGUBbuDZOfCi0KHF88ZUHg-1; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:16:59 -0400 X-MC-Unique: GGUBbuDZOfCi0KHF88ZUHg-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f197.google.com with SMTP id 131so744145vkz.2 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:16:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pu5Kn45VlQ7VEXpR6dmno1fwnIDJRY3snSdwPz/mQTk=; b=TDjEpAH71N6g3kVATyns8fsn+wHDec2BdWr4nx/GTWYeQciHaK106lan/FXCR4yD5R FwFeM/Jn/tGBS1nVWUMaS8FeJ1mcfj1gIjlXu/pSPxk5pHHLwcOcQgR/oKawoOlYl+j7 5XSD7EzjvGRY6YlY8kx/gsTLSUpeUN28HPsfeoZ441W5XzSFwIQq7aerLq9S3FXURhqp lbGH6cf/0Pw8gXL/YXITEdHy5JgNjiNDqZhU+na0Scqgtt6qFh8Wpsq56QZ+/HdNY7qu nbSzinxI+2lsGg5SbZIVoR3f3VIhLjtL5PZRUdS0ncwBV4VkMeaYa8jp7Zy8ujMdf78/ hG+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304pGI3TJaD4cKgLM+TEh7YiDlc+jHv1ZG8XvwmwAytw55LrBsd qzFMoYH17To7hgCvbZ2u5ZKqzxLiwuypP6IHy5O1jQMNGCVHBd5SFLcBdoGBSbOvHfrk+iRyf8j IRCzTI8NUVnRTzdQh/bQ= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:3a97:: with SMTP id r23mr4685364uaw.87.1616681818493; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:16:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx1QhrqoMwwIo02+F9jpDpScgjsC0OanY8N9Yr/5f4VU8Sy1zB7s/XIY3/XlvNyMbGBTJA91eu76idEwoborDI= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:3a97:: with SMTP id r23mr4685339uaw.87.1616681818303; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 07:16:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210114071346.18235-1-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:16:47 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Burakov, Anatoly" , Bruce Richardson Cc: dev , Hemant Agrawal 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] tailq: secondary process may not have all tailq available 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 Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 6:55 AM Hemant Agrawal wrote: > On 1/14/2021 7:14 PM, David Marchand wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 8:24 AM Hemant Agrawal wrote: > >> Secondary process may not have all the tailq available for > >> mapping, so better to ignore the error. > >> > >> e.g. if the primary process is linked with N libs > >> and secondary process is linked with less number of libs. > >> > >> dpdk-procinfo results into following error: > >> EAL: Cannot initialize tailq: VMBUS_RESOURCE_LIST > > For dpdk-procinfo to complain about vmbus, it means the bus driver has > > been loaded in the secondary, but not in the primary. > > Is this what you intend to do? > > > Yes. > > Typically the customer applications are built/linked with only limited > number of bus, devices > > dpdk-procinfo is getting compiled with default list as part of dpdk > build. so, if customer is trying to use the default dpdk-procinfo with > their application - there will be differences. > Is this a usecase that we support or we want to support? Thanks. -- David Marchand