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 438A745ECE; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 10:06:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3085F402A9; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 10:06:26 +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 36E85402A3 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 10:06:24 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1734426383; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=U5+w1KnXr/54Yh5FiZ/fqCR1YafHECr5EiWH5jXMtlE=; b=d/7p77cGr8m7dskSC8zjpkc7LD80F2Vf0UAnEA0wGyZJbEhnj5CiT8d0BZ4On3+6DPh8g8 1wJFl5/Mry5VghGpTir52EQ7OfpL4UFgk1cqlPFJ4juO1fkkSX+GwGV8/2jSLVv0M2kbKj coV8e1Zym/Ub3q0zB3IgPZBmYOfB8og= Received: from mail-lj1-f198.google.com (mail-lj1-f198.google.com [209.85.208.198]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-402-lVLPmGFTP6Gi6MRyAzd9qQ-1; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 04:06:22 -0500 X-MC-Unique: lVLPmGFTP6Gi6MRyAzd9qQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: lVLPmGFTP6Gi6MRyAzd9qQ Received: by mail-lj1-f198.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-30220a23430so25764921fa.3 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 01:06:22 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1734426381; x=1735031181; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=U5+w1KnXr/54Yh5FiZ/fqCR1YafHECr5EiWH5jXMtlE=; b=e0kTHu1E/Dkvx7yoEZICfvQUYCOr7W6oR3IJsc+/SmsUAZjeyg9l4zNxDzz/oFFbCl 5TtWWs+40TDyw4iTaahWS3Il37DIngMv73aSSE5SW3yrXTFVBfKj1wp714ySCJx9GW09 o1Qn5ABykcAQotJhW4eiSqnCeM5uWyhTWNCcGuQqu2QoitiOAOvg05JK7sYVlXfwd/3w fsG7ntqIM/PNUuvbR9f0pKgjn6mATVZzMOWhLBJB2h45kJcDvUnanMm0WxvXHab79I1g NcXX6m5wLTm21a+bH97MG+6/R8ZHmx56kmBc3smBMSSG1iNqrC5RcB9dVy6JYjOjZ8oO qoow== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxnCUL5OcRJirKPLJClZka3wDM7KDo7vHUsyM+AhrPXyuYFCPuZ ZTnKUieoAi23s/fb34s/k52ngwAy2B7QjwEKudDXM3jBByZCLMpvxZ8o0xnxb6M6rxuEdIV+kS4 A1rQ+Fuk8x6mN5mR5yoIJqzTorcmgAPZsRBKj7nSy2pRRUOQFEG3bMPqUw/4UYxNH6Qy8rTOcKC WPd5N39vy01aK2NwI= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvQmps9MnerduHrFoHQH08Fe5iMxCL9+6VfrIroRZnsxghfVss6DI3AdN1FwzQ GGw4qPdbPCpvhQWDgf8nNtRncSJoB89JR81VCqBJt X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a54e:0:b0:2ff:a7c1:8c2e with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-302544ae844mr65365451fa.28.1734426381051; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 01:06:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF0ZtwwjBGqAs3/9J+NMZtRruqoS2t+a6fFysyT+JaHaJzKzoOaa+3jUSI63Uf4W71eNyab/g9Aq5mX8BYVcYs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a54e:0:b0:2ff:a7c1:8c2e with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-302544ae844mr65365351fa.28.1734426380702; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 01:06:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20241205175754.1673888-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 10:06:09 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Defer lcore variables allocation To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, frode.nordahl@canonical.com, mattias.ronnblom@ericsson.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: AG-TUm6XxmI0SZB63XxfTo-lcyQdbnNRmEbsiv6OGko_1734426381 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 10:49=E2=80=AFAM David Marchand wrote: > > > For now, this series only focus on fixing subsystems using lcore > > > variables so that those allocations are deferred either in rte_eal_in= it() > > > or in the path that does require such lcore variables. > > > > > > > > > > An idle question: would this have any consequences in use case of eal > > init -> eal cleanup -> eal init with different arguments? > > Hum, interesting question. > > I would say that initialising lcore variables in constructors means > that this usecase is broken, since lcore variables are freed in > eal_lcore_var_cleanup(). I posted a v2, though this issue you noticed is still present. --=20 David Marchand