From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0C04B79
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:21:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214]
 helo=[192.168.0.10])
 by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <olivier.matz@6wind.com>)
 id 1apZ07-00088j-9p; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:23:23 +0200
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
References: <1460367203-30925-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <7090107.qEOdApp0aR@xps13>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Message-ID: <570B7AA8.1010804@6wind.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:21:28 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7090107.qEOdApp0aR@xps13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] autotests: fix mempool element size in
 func_reentrancy
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: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 10:21:35 -0000



On 04/11/2016 12:12 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-04-11 11:33, Olivier Matz:
>> --- a/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c
>> +++ b/app/test/test_func_reentrancy.c
>> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ typedef void (*case_clean_t)(unsigned lcore_id);
>>  #define MAX_ITER_TIMES                      (16)
>>  #define MAX_LPM_ITER_TIMES                  (8)
>>  
>> -#define MEMPOOL_ELT_SIZE                    (0)
>> +#define MEMPOOL_ELT_SIZE                    (sizeof(uint32))
> 
> I understand the idea of the patch.
> Using uint32_t would probably make a good fix ;)
> Applied correctly, thanks

You perfectly got the idea :)
Thanks and sorry for the typo...