From: "Qiu, Michael" <michael.qiu@intel.com>
To: "Pattan, Reshma" <reshma.pattan@intel.com>,
"Doherty, Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] librte_ether: remove RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET and RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 04:40:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E6028622F04D4E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831FF8E2AD@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 12/25/2015 1:40 AM, Pattan, Reshma wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Qiu, Michael
>> On 12/23/2015 8:19 PM, Reshma Pattan wrote:
>>> Macros RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET and
>> RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET are
>>> blocking the secondary process from using the APIs.
>>> API access should be given to both secondary and primary.
>> Just as the log says, is it safe to do so?
>
> Hi,
>
> Some parts of the code still need these macros, which I am not sure yet. But as and when we identify those we have to add the macros to the needed places.
> But it is safe to remove from start of function to allow secondary process to do device configuration and queue setups for vdev.
> Please let me know if you know any of such cases where these macros should be added.
You you have removed almost all secondary check, and as I know, with
your patch, secondary almost has full control of a device, what's the
exact demand for secondary to have full API access?
It's a big change for DPDK I think, but patch set itself is good for me:)
Thanks,
Michael
> Thanks,
> Reshma
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-28 4:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-23 12:19 Reshma Pattan
2015-12-23 12:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] librte_cryptodev: remove RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Reshma Pattan
2015-12-23 12:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] librte_ether: fix rte_eth_dev_configure Reshma Pattan
2015-12-24 8:01 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] librte_ether: remove RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET and RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Qiu, Michael
2015-12-24 17:40 ` Pattan, Reshma
2015-12-28 4:40 ` Qiu, Michael [this message]
2016-01-05 10:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 " Reshma Pattan
2016-01-05 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] fix RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Reshma Pattan
2016-01-05 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] librte_ether: remove RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET and RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Reshma Pattan
2016-01-05 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] librte_cryptodev: remove RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Reshma Pattan
2016-01-05 16:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] librte_ether: fix rte_eth_dev_configure Reshma Pattan
2016-01-06 13:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] fix RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_ERR_RET RTE_PROC_PRIMARY_OR_RET Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-02-24 18:25 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-05 9:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-02-05 14:58 ` Pattan, Reshma
2016-02-05 15:05 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E6028622F04D4E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=michael.qiu@intel.com \
--cc=declan.doherty@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=reshma.pattan@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).