From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com (mail-wi0-f176.google.com
 [209.85.212.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 602B2AFCF
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:01:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id n3so7320059wiv.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
 :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=Tp6Umo3EtQy8DpNdSqeaKAWBIprsU0tfbVZ3DVHAmJc=;
 b=Vq47fRE4+jVofHdw9YdI3fVT4jRyWI1boM7DHb1J6iVsjOTCjJVWcO3JhngfIfaVMN
 bpi6U6uI/GKe/jS2EM6k9py+pnlpR7BkQW04qWMlH9HBH04B/fpbtZalRf45n7Di4B0M
 /pUG2Twnrz0o+7P+3pOXTgZ634fuAlTj7QlfIFwudYFd6iMwsoXIm94HmnhlsvdodDup
 Ibyv145orTezaaNl0mqhDimUgih58hyPJslpAs5ERmE1LDu5DB+OhLKbJlHXxxcltLij
 ptDyZmynvFOThExFICVO3fnaEtvwZpCHusIyM8UZ69SZPKRUXAYLxcN7JhEmnIu5+McA
 yZbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmMaN71iQ15qy4PGU8JORrtKaB8t6R9b3S3WBiKdFBfoAhJ4TePeZAj12Qx+WqewLcyQllE
X-Received: by 10.195.11.132 with SMTP id ei4mr7640166wjd.95.1403683319831;
 Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.16.0.195] (6wind.net2.nerim.net. [213.41.180.237])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id jv9sm5807995wjc.28.2014.06.25.01.01.58
 for <multiple recipients>
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Wed, 25 Jun 2014 01:01:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53AA81EF.5010601@6wind.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:01:51 +0200
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, 
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
References: <20140624084948.6d4ab3cd@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
 <53AA7E64.5060707@6wind.com>
In-Reply-To: <53AA7E64.5060707@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mempool: don't leak ring on failure
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:01:41 -0000

On 06/25/2014 09:46 AM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> Your patch moves the creation of the ring after the call to
> rte_memzone_reserve(), so now it tries to create the memory
> for the object pool before the ring. The problem disappears
> because the object pool is usually much bigger than the ring,
> so once the first allocation is done, the second is unlikely
> to fail.
>
> I think this explanation could be added in the commit log.
>
> Acked-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>

Sorry, I didn't see that Konstantin and Bruce already answered to
this.