From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: check cpu flags at init Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 16:13:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1838224.hc711l76sy@xps13> References: <1474642051-9973-1-git-send-email-fbl@sysclose.org> <20160927183237.GA27384@plex> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Aaron Conole To: Flavio Leitner Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f42.google.com (mail-lf0-f42.google.com [209.85.215.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8001158C8 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 16:13:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf0-f42.google.com with SMTP id b75so24301184lfg.3 for ; Mon, 03 Oct 2016 07:13:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2016-09-29 16:42, Aaron Conole: > Flavio Leitner writes: > > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:43:37AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: > >> My only concern is whether this change would be considered ABI > >> breaking. I wouldn't think so, since it doesn't seem as though an > >> application would want to call this explicitly (and is spelled out as > >> such), but I can't be sure that it isn't already included in the > >> standard application API, and therefore needs to go through the change > >> process. > > > > I didn't want to change the original behavior more than needed. > > > > I think another patch would be necessary to change the whole EAL > > initialization because there's a bunch of rte_panic() there which > > aren't friendly with callers either. Yes please, we need to remove all those panic/exit calls. > Okay makes sense. > > Acked-by: Aaron Conole Applied, thanks