From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6348DA046B
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:16:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3AB1E2F;
	Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:16:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-ua1-f49.google.com (mail-ua1-f49.google.com
 [209.85.222.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909D91E2F
 for <stable@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:16:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-ua1-f49.google.com with SMTP id f20so1948478ual.0
 for <stable@dpdk.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 02:16:26 -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=uHkq9TjjgFxruxHXt5SVzb7+pCztkSFGKl37XjMVPn4=;
 b=IpTQOi84nXqf+yI4DMdtzCB/9ywp0RrWs9IVvljXqf324QH6cEPx/+rvD3e+P53g01
 JKZOrzMnQUQrEFoOULTsxtct7Bd52pojjCwxd2u56cFEATjXTqq+FkP4nyppT3fksLqI
 4W5/XUDtPYfH0+Xqr8FZ8Wv8yQnaI9SY7H+hPBOqz8VWpogNN1jvHmcwHigaZrZhog1L
 tC9o9uds/dyH9WvgoHAUaF+l5r1Zzm8mGAPlVh4g0dg7qcZNQtcikeEKHA0kSjPQJ2qu
 trZBFc1BdUEi58kB4kIKIysvkKeX4j++Rmcmzz4lus0oulMpWBpV/drSeMdqlVDc3gkC
 yy/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUR67cMBJyXCfYbCgBJGM52+0Jjrd9bTqh+qpO+ccOu9J2tJeOc
 WuePkqbrxcqmXPQnCwPM69gP756LEhrjV8Vm3wLtLA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzzoSd2yL4niaqUeOYAf80PZVnhtkUrbLf9b6EoSSdAziJH2/Xy/QakgdGKLuV5oQeoSH9z4FGukZDjKhMVEp0=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:b99:: with SMTP id c25mr5205204uak.53.1561713385967;
 Fri, 28 Jun 2019 02:16:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190628034406.5399-1-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
 <20190628034406.5399-2-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190628034406.5399-2-honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:16:15 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8ydEKmzcHEw3jytboQPo4CVBOpx18JbEfoBP_tZRwM=8A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, ruifeng.wang@arm.com, nd <nd@arm.com>, 
 dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 2/2] test/rcu: address test case failure
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>,
 <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 5:44 AM Honnappa Nagarahalli <
honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com> wrote:

> Test case for rte_rcu_qsbr_get_memsize is written specifically
> for 128 threads. Do not use RTE_MAX_LCORE as it changes for
> different configurations.
>

Does it mean this test can only work on arm with 256 lcores?
How many cores does this test require?


-- 
David Marchand