From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48132377E for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 16:54:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B06664E02E; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:54:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from t450s.home (ovpn03.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.3]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u6SEsu8V011222; Thu, 28 Jul 2016 10:54:56 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:54:56 -0600 From: Alex Williamson To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: Thomas Monjalon , "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20160728085456.1f752faf@t450s.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20160727161457.7992c756@t450s.home> <2860054.FZ01Xh8IR9@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:54:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [bug] dpdk-vfio: Invalid region/index assumption 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: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:54:57 -0000 On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 09:42:13 +0000 "Burakov, Anatoly" wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 2016-07-27 16:14, Alex Williamson: > > > I took a quick look at the dpdk vfio code and spotted an invalid > > > assumption that should probably be corrected ASAP. > > > > It can theoretically be a bug but the value may never change in the kernel, > > right? > > So when you say ASAP, I feel it can wait the next DPDK release (we plan to > > release today). > > Do you agree? > > Unless there are imminent plans to change this in the kernel, I think it can wait for next release. I don't have any plans to change it, but this relationship is not a guaranteed part of the ABI. I reserve the right to make such changes in the future. Thanks, Alex