From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED60C56A1 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 18:13:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 05 Jul 2016 09:13:56 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,580,1459839600"; d="scan'208";a="1011322651" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.220.53]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 05 Jul 2016 09:13:48 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 05 Jul 2016 17:13:47 +0025 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 17:13:47 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Jan Medala Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, Alexander Matushevsky , Jakub Palider Message-ID: <20160705161346.GB26504@bricha3-MOBL3> References: <1466510763-19569-6-git-send-email-jan@semihalf.com> <1467299099-32498-1-git-send-email-jan@semihalf.com> <1467299099-32498-6-git-send-email-jan@semihalf.com> <20160704162750.GB23380@bricha3-MOBL3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160704162750.GB23380@bricha3-MOBL3> Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/6] ena: fix memory management issue X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:13:57 -0000 On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 05:27:50PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 05:04:58PM +0200, Jan Medala wrote: > > After allocating memzone it's required to zeroize memory in it. > > Freeing memzone with function dedicated for memoryzones. > > > > Can you provide a fixes line for this patch? > >>From looking at git blame, it looks to be: Fixes: 9ba7981ec992 ("ena: add communication layer for DPDK") Please confirm that is ok. /Bruce