DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Cc: David Christensen <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal:ppc: fix incorrect ifdef for ppc_64
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 18:35:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8x4GW6U0wV+i5mC+hc2UMj+LnYJb4-bNEn6V_cbnq1EWw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b23f288-242e-b280-4ec5-c790e777c4fc@intel.com>

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 6:18 PM Burakov, Anatoly
<anatoly.burakov@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 16-Oct-19 9:45 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> >>> An ifdef present in eal_memory.c references "RTE_ARCH_PPC64" when
> >>> it should actually use "RTE_ARCH_PPC_64".  Simple testing revealed
> >>> that both the PPC_64 and non-PPC_64 versions of the code involved
> >>> work, but the PPC_64 version of the code is retained to be
> >>> consistent with other instances in the same file where mmapped
> >>> memory is accessed in reverse order on Power platforms.
> >>
> >> The change itself is not that scary, but just reading this commitlog I
> >> fail to see the impact for an application.
> >> Can you share some light?
> >>
> >
> > As far as I can tell there is no impact on any applications.  The old
> > code, which walked through the list in a forward direction, worked
> > perfectly well with testpmd and DPDK pktgen applications on Power systems.
> >
> > With the ifdef fixed, the core walks the list in the reverse direction
> > as intended, the code still worked (i.e. no errors or problems were
> > observed in the same test applications).
> >
> > I'm not completely familiar with why memseg lists must be traversed in
> > the reverse direction for Power systems.  It might be something specific
> > to Power 8 systems which I'm not actually supporting on DPDK, only the
> > Power 9 systems that I use for for development and testing.
> >
> > Dave
> >
>
> If the code makes no difference anyway, should we just take it out so?

+1 :-)


-- 
David Marchand


  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-17 16:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-25 21:42 David Christensen
2019-09-26  7:43 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-10-24  9:36   ` David Marchand
2019-10-16 15:16 ` David Marchand
2019-10-16 20:45   ` David Christensen
2019-10-17 16:18     ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-10-17 16:35       ` David Marchand [this message]
2019-10-17 16:55         ` David Christensen
2019-10-24  7:40           ` David Marchand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAJFAV8x4GW6U0wV+i5mC+hc2UMj+LnYJb4-bNEn6V_cbnq1EWw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).