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 3C45EA0096 for ; Fri, 10 May 2019 00:07:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC754C6C; Fri, 10 May 2019 00:07:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D353977 for ; Fri, 10 May 2019 00:07:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D375820F25; Thu, 9 May 2019 18:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 09 May 2019 18:07:43 -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=VtpSfVkezAMZl+38wfwKYk0mD4LzknF7pSkijTk0oK8=; b=isCC9hBqRkLO zf8GQlSbVCcW7wgigycY/aAwki3L6XZyaVVel3y2E2/LXk+VIFnAbZevjsVtXUsR sDdlL+oNTYCuAWnh74ykh9qg1mKNle7T0KuTYmrxOp5XcpCHT1L0B93ELhivB9Jh 4mNCW6xf2eTKqxbX77TXyUzKwy/H5eM= 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=VtpSfVkezAMZl+38wfwKYk0mD4LzknF7pSkijTk0o K8=; b=anQNa2JIbz9AAQWSqRDQv2q2OKyY6mo1GaJvD7N3+etFl4QIOaM7/cLvC BIirqz4SN26CdqA8VU28QaErTY/ruiaX0ua4bLgKcAPTkIm+JtcTFCAf6bEZZ6bI SlEtN7eIWf0/wsheJPbOFkddVeOk3MZDZnYGZnBgWfMY1DLJij7kaTTXXdhm9CtI aZBvofVASkO0FR5P51l9E7e+UvkB9tvUo+cmqy7mlOqi6+ZqJZvxZ0DecEstRC2Q wPdX8qMf7d5unJeXCSk6Ax0U3jqTjHOeVBkvzgESNqrMq7mtguSEaqZ0k7G6pcxK rRu8w/bwXe4BeGyI2MGnB5dQjizrw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrkeeigddutdelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhh ohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt 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 A8F09103D1; Thu, 9 May 2019 18:07:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Carrillo, Erik G" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Burakov, Anatoly" , "rsanford@akamai.com" Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 00:07:41 +0200 Message-ID: <2184478.DUg6BWIauh@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1557353861-31997-1-git-send-email-erik.g.carrillo@intel.com> <5432120.ZjB8uZtkDB@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] timer: allow first subsystem init from secondary 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: <20190509220741.OuUmogo5hPr-AN2kdVsVp2AwcgFvipIJjDLG9SF25Y0@z> 09/05/2019 23:19, Carrillo, Erik G: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 09/05/2019 22:08, Carrillo, Erik G: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > > 09/05/2019 21:39, Erik Gabriel Carrillo: > > > > > Since memzones can be reserved from secondary processes as well as > > > > > primary processes, if the first call to the timer subsystem init > > > > > function occurs in a secondary process, we should allow it to succeed. > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: c0749f7096c7 ("timer: allow management in shared memory") > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Erik Gabriel Carrillo > > > > > > > > I think this patch is too big for -rc4. > > > > And it doesn't look so critical. > > > > Do you agree to wait 19.08? > > > > > > > > > > The very last hunk of the patch should at least be applied, as it fixes an > > issue in the finalize() function. The rest of it is just to make sure the behavior > > is the same as the prior release with respect to the secondary. > > > > > > I'd prefer if the whole patch was applied, but I can break out the last hunk > > for a very small patch if that's what you think we should do. > > > > It's a pity it comes so late. > > > > Can you tell how much you think it won't bring any regression? > > Are you available everyday until Monday to fix it quickly if something goes > > wrong? > > > I'm fairly sure there won't be a regression; I just did some more testing on the secondary side. But I will be available to fix it if something does go wrong. Applied, thanks