From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB71C1C7F1 for ; Mon, 14 May 2018 14:23:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 May 2018 05:23:41 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,399,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="55008536" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.6.248]) ([10.252.6.248]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 May 2018 05:23:40 -0700 To: Remy Horton , dev@dpdk.org Cc: sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com References: <777ae6b10a7524e188c07ba14e576fc7b0e21018.1524729978.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <952c259e-eb94-0a8d-7966-00e3591f9c37@intel.com> <456f4736-856e-3b06-4c8c-a74adfd0b723@intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 13:23:40 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <456f4736-856e-3b06-4c8c-a74adfd0b723@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] memzone: improve zero-length memzone reserve X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:23:43 -0000 On 14-May-18 12:29 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > On 14-May-18 9:21 AM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: >> On 11-May-18 11:25 AM, Remy Horton wrote: >>> >>> On 03/05/2018 18:18, Anatoly Burakov wrote: >>> [..] >>>> Also, fixup unit tests to account for the new behavior. >>> >>> Tried running the tests but it fails on a boundary check: >>> >>> RTE>>memzone_autotest >>> test basic memzone API >>> [...] >>> 1GB Huge pages available >>> test alignment for memzone_reserve >>> check alignments and lengths >>> check overlapping >>> test boundary alignment for memzone_reserve >>> check_memzone_bounded(MZ_TEST_bounded_128): invalid memzone boundary >>> 128 crossed >>> Test Failed >>> RTE>> >>> >> >> Hi Remy, >> >> Passes here, but i'll look into it, thanks for the report. >> > > This failure is not caused by this patchset, and you should get similar > failures on master if you get these while testing my patchset. I am not > able to reproduce this issue, but i'll double-check the bounded reserve > code with a fine-toothed comb anyway. > Further investigation showed that this is indeed related to the new code. So, v5 has a bug too, i'll fix it for v6. -- Thanks, Anatoly