From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 318403572 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:40:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B383720F51; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 15:40:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 01 Apr 2019 15:40:03 -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=mesmtp; bh=SqbjlZQShU3AlEtpIt003e4H3QLsJj488Unrsdqtrac=; b=N5Uu/g1JCjhz X/D76hnHpIzmn7zkxd4mQFY1Bgifex/50hIGdTe/tEleXt9myZP2WvNQBgZV+DYM QlX5ToA4nXuR34euCDRpfuGyaJdpmyPWxUAv6DO0YRP9UE4OE/ljz+/DDxFYnwz3 l4QJxQmjPBpFO7DQIzFekK0s8oECwVA= 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=fm2; bh=SqbjlZQShU3AlEtpIt003e4H3QLsJj488Unrsdqtr ac=; b=n5Emk+o917jfl92XRhgjhcC89F9xzzy+Czy8EXxb/9gXCKUJIpVRk4UYl 7oTcT/hbPQz7dO00bCqPT0T72GU+bPk153InhsjcvMyg/dM9eqshEWp/4/RHAuGo DSt6LfUiKmGxmLyMwrWrvjf1dpB0MMPEjwFA862hRtscU4C25UVSGlcICUyc14F5 1oUx0k0rRIV0maFlhDaB2Vz6rplQqLp62B2zyoF7rPDMEoaMwZV2fApXFhhQcCxV 0YHf4WieOaYY2i7An0l/hFxQy7KTaDcYYlYlLdoQ0afWXqNTLc7J/eLkDTBkPO4+ Yr+4x+fB42C1b6DcOL+wy2H1HlkQQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrleeggddufeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd 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 DD33FE4980; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 15:40:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Aaron Conole Cc: "Pattan, Reshma" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Babu Radhakrishnan, AgalyaX" , "Parthasarathy, JananeeX M" , David Marchand Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 21:39:58 +0200 Message-ID: <1762513.D2pieINcJM@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190329172241.11916-1-aconole@redhat.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A433A0F@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/3] test/meson: auto detect number of cores 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, 01 Apr 2019 19:40:07 -0000 01/04/2019 19:48, Aaron Conole: > "Pattan, Reshma" writes: > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole > >> > >> Some environments do not provide a minimum 4 cores for running tests. This > >> allows those environments to still execute 'ninja test' without causing multiple > >> failures. > >> > > > > FYI, there is a patch http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/50850/ doing something similar. > > > > --file-prefix is not supported on FreeBSD, so how about you also > > include the related fix from above patch link into your patch series? > > Is that other patch going to be accepted? Then I can drop this patch > from my series. Otherwise, I'll fold in such a change with my next > version. Sorry, I'm late on applying patches for unit tests. As I am not sure which one will get the best review first, you should keep it with a note that it conflicts with the other one. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F57BA0679 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:40:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC2E3576; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:40:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 318403572 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 21:40:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B383720F51; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 15:40:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 01 Apr 2019 15:40:03 -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=mesmtp; bh=SqbjlZQShU3AlEtpIt003e4H3QLsJj488Unrsdqtrac=; b=N5Uu/g1JCjhz X/D76hnHpIzmn7zkxd4mQFY1Bgifex/50hIGdTe/tEleXt9myZP2WvNQBgZV+DYM QlX5ToA4nXuR34euCDRpfuGyaJdpmyPWxUAv6DO0YRP9UE4OE/ljz+/DDxFYnwz3 l4QJxQmjPBpFO7DQIzFekK0s8oECwVA= 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=fm2; bh=SqbjlZQShU3AlEtpIt003e4H3QLsJj488Unrsdqtr ac=; b=n5Emk+o917jfl92XRhgjhcC89F9xzzy+Czy8EXxb/9gXCKUJIpVRk4UYl 7oTcT/hbPQz7dO00bCqPT0T72GU+bPk153InhsjcvMyg/dM9eqshEWp/4/RHAuGo DSt6LfUiKmGxmLyMwrWrvjf1dpB0MMPEjwFA862hRtscU4C25UVSGlcICUyc14F5 1oUx0k0rRIV0maFlhDaB2Vz6rplQqLp62B2zyoF7rPDMEoaMwZV2fApXFhhQcCxV 0YHf4WieOaYY2i7An0l/hFxQy7KTaDcYYlYlLdoQ0afWXqNTLc7J/eLkDTBkPO4+ Yr+4x+fB42C1b6DcOL+wy2H1HlkQQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedutddrleeggddufeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtne cuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd 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 DD33FE4980; Mon, 1 Apr 2019 15:40:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Aaron Conole Cc: "Pattan, Reshma" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Babu Radhakrishnan, AgalyaX" , "Parthasarathy, JananeeX M" , David Marchand Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2019 21:39:58 +0200 Message-ID: <1762513.D2pieINcJM@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20190329172241.11916-1-aconole@redhat.com> <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F2A433A0F@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/3] test/meson: auto detect number of cores 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" Message-ID: <20190401193958.nDI0Fl0tpCa-htGqLD3IB9YtiLLc0xB_C12kI9FJVXo@z> 01/04/2019 19:48, Aaron Conole: > "Pattan, Reshma" writes: > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Conole > >> > >> Some environments do not provide a minimum 4 cores for running tests. This > >> allows those environments to still execute 'ninja test' without causing multiple > >> failures. > >> > > > > FYI, there is a patch http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/50850/ doing something similar. > > > > --file-prefix is not supported on FreeBSD, so how about you also > > include the related fix from above patch link into your patch series? > > Is that other patch going to be accepted? Then I can drop this patch > from my series. Otherwise, I'll fold in such a change with my next > version. Sorry, I'm late on applying patches for unit tests. As I am not sure which one will get the best review first, you should keep it with a note that it conflicts with the other one.