From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <laswell@infinite.io>
Received: from mail-wm0-f54.google.com (mail-wm0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F9AA1B199
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:18:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f54.google.com with SMTP id q124so6444835wmb.0
 for <users@dpdk.org>; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:18:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=infinite-io.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=IkLMKWee3mIgL5guDpdmVXg0N4MDHEQOVRPbAZqJuwo=;
 b=bBAGTo2asbCGJUTpvZ6m/JnOUl17CDNG3kSDl4a54awJz2poWFYFVQZwU9f5LL0N9G
 4GWvQ05UzYtQbWaJXBQuNkBO0xAiod9ZFi9GYQTqo9MWM7QrIYYL4DnsiJF/MmYvvbcd
 R96b2wPa3p9ZpX7Ac92sdoXRxXxlQez/bvGBk721BWHvBfSmGV55y/RWLfsxIla7vNDE
 XnWiKvEjWOflwUePuFKT3TJ2z3ITZ6isCKaT34Tw9rNwo3QHh14wydnstb9YR3gFXre4
 MnQGM2423la9eo+XsLs8GPm9d8QPI0V4GqyjJq0EFpUagrYg6MkEemSTs5AHfEmt5NeV
 Jy6A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=IkLMKWee3mIgL5guDpdmVXg0N4MDHEQOVRPbAZqJuwo=;
 b=paZBoLRYIn+65w0iGUp1zoyxLTIo2t11qqD1+HY4pQ58xskJCJIrOicIsVUNjf0pWo
 DBLkjdvE8PjzauTL2CWkfBgbWHohh9x2kAAwM8ZwZpylYbbxePPT7E5JUF5r5Lrrfx0V
 DIco71Xc4WJoaI1HQEUZg+rKLY1N9ilDQQqAtIDHXIhGLIj1FYhdSbOtbfLjdMHfi+YM
 +jxto6cOfuKFgJ6jdxt3RvqlIQp9ShHRZvOQxDyLacv3MtCdLPPHTwrrSSvPFhTvF+I6
 5TwmmjvkIJAzS9jKHBT6/kpSa8gJeDOll6Kp7eDLl8Nbh6afXnPdDWI4e3LclaJwEn2F
 Gt6w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUhsZxhDIThyWKGDBRzw7vD37YAwWzR993uJg2HWgXFgx7EsPUJ9
 4X/sYV/2TIIlnSRkaMxgkghVeHvw5rWDOc7coYa8oty+
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCfpmPi4YSLjZjOEKkFYiZ3VhjucqDhjGnENoAojMFNv0b84Tho664IDB/QTe5ssqT6KrzIn4qDO06JXtCgeP8=
X-Received: by 10.28.150.82 with SMTP id y79mr4494631wmd.54.1506107908532;
 Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:18:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.187.145 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Sep 2017 12:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matt Laswell <laswell@infinite.io>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:18:27 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+GnqAp0k2A1kEV63Repj2VNfzGqibcvjpbsM0n4fvm=RBTj8g@mail.gmail.com>
To: users <users@dpdk.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-users] Safe to rte_exit() during EAL init?
X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK usage discussions <users.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/>
List-Post: <mailto:users@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/users>,
 <mailto:users-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 19:18:29 -0000

Hey Folks,

In our application, EAL initialization can take a very long time due to a
large amount of huge page memory.  Under some circumstances such as
software updates, we would like to cut that process off early.  Is it OK to
call rte_exit() while rte_eal_init() is still running?

Thanks.

--
Matt Laswell
infinite io, inc.