From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53342A0093; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:51:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F27E84C90; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:51:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC654C87 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:51:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD5A5C00A4; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 03:51:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 15 Jun 2020 03:51:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= MTANusm1jvb6ZCaDR6dn5m+MIaQQZhIyX2R0yLSwwtc=; b=SV3JYaGTxaFluUx1 AYiAy1h9fRIEGX3isFbZFMZ37saWNXommn4aGekwFu0y1Rzma4kb3pAlQmrjtV52 zRLcOx3Qts1y2nz1aAHJP6nOUVm7wnukhc4jfd2WX00sBi6VAxeduf4lOFK+QTXc SqfvVVjHMFCZVGShCJmsEeyL8jidmnpMKGV9LXOHYX9BE+OWWkotWLmtsv7wLGlG MXPaKp2vBpKI1uFWyZmsr4qkCcqk6JF0uLuNS+Z70+1KSGCBoGjrDLAY0mA3+zqR 09TL3eZRHGTqnCZqZhQahV28lXUebq3VB91b1U6QYtKunr8liRdAXBKu4NHVxNN0 0UbBzQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=MTANusm1jvb6ZCaDR6dn5m+MIaQQZhIyX2R0yLSww tc=; b=Hoa+fuzcq0VjfUnqbppXAJAQy56ZaYR2FebEoj5Hld9sflvUD1XYCWgSc 0wjnR/cVIj3cDQFnXZk+FRDVJfz0M2KjrciTNHAwYUfHeQ3Bg0fIZi0A2F+53AXK 7OmmLCYxY/m02SfejYUJsPj4iGXElbYhSH2sSDmglVF4yUWl60Oe0RV+THvqQDWN +CVe212W6TYlAnHqvjqGhewNb5ON0E1RIhwejxW3tzciFWGRhyGV3MUE/qK8Zdnl 6pkifXaafRz8Uyak3Pb/Esc0R8lLnUo5q4CE0AKhruXdpB8T7/5c8cO6wtLBLsER wnmft7dPrw4QiIKgTJ7yzo+gRxnuQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrudeijedguddvjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeffvdffjeeuteelfeeileduudeugfetjeelveefkeejfeeigeeh teffvdekfeegudenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecukfhppeejjedrudefge drvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhl fhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2710A3280059; Mon, 15 Jun 2020 03:51:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Dmitry Kozlyuk , Tasnim Bashar Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com, bruce.richardson@intel.com, Harini Ramakrishnan , Omar Cardona , Pallavi Kadam , Ranjit Menon Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:51:48 +0200 Message-ID: <1644346.HDDl6ptmbL@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20200615040533.6c213a5f@sovereign> References: <20200614225747.3839569-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <2071651.hbnvd6Rhsx@thomas> <20200615040533.6c213a5f@sovereign> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] devtools: add Windows cross-build test with MinGW 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 15/06/2020 03:05, Dmitry Kozlyuk: > > It looks to be a false positive, but we need to find a way to remove > > the warning with a code change. > > > > This workaround in lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c > > makes 200% sure the default_set is initialized: > > > > - if (pthread_getaffinity_np(pthread_self(), sizeof(rte_cpuset_t), > > - &default_set)) > > - CPU_ZERO(&default_set); > > - > > + CPU_ZERO(&default_set); > > + pthread_getaffinity_np(pthread_self(), > > + sizeof default_set, &default_set); > > > > Doesn't look like a false-positive to me. That's where it's been spotted > and explained before: > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-May/168634.html > > And this series eliminates it along with other improvements: > > http://patchwork.dpdk.org/patch/70727/ I see. So the fix must be explained (and probably a separate patch).