From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp02.365-24.se (smtp02.365-24.se [217.151.195.247]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EB9B594C for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:09:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.hiq.se (unknown [10.30.1.40]) by smtp02.365-24.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE419651 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:09:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from HIQQBEXC101.sto.hiq.se ([::1]) by HIQQBEXC101.sto.hiq.se ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 11:09:45 +0200 From: Tomas Vestelind To: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: Calling rte_eal_init multiple times in the same process Thread-Index: Ac9aHMIppvYKIJWwRRG7OpqisSXY/w== Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 09:09:44 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: sv-SE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [194.218.229.28] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-dev] Calling rte_eal_init multiple times in the same process 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, 17 Apr 2014 09:09:44 -0000 Dear all, I'm not sure who to address with this email so I'll just present my problem= and my suggested solution. The problem I'm facing is that I need to do rte_eal_init serveral times in = the same process. The reason for this is mostly architectural as we want to= divide certain functionality in to different, implementation independent, = modules in which DPDK would be used for different purposes. Thus we would n= eed to eventually call rte_eal_init several times because we can't say for = sure if it has been called by another module or not. While thinking about it I saw no good, existing solution to this (I might h= ave missed it though). Would returning a "DPDK has already been initialized= " error code in rte_eal_init be a good way to go about it? I haven't done t= his yet but I could probably provide a patch if it's interesting. Thank you for your time and a very nice framework with good documentation! BR, Tomas