From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Cc: Ruifeng Wang <Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com>,
"olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>,
"thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Justin He <Justin.He@arm.com>,
"Honnappa Nagarahalli" <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/mbuf: fix the forked process segment fault
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 08:21:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230522082159.452ae26c@hermes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ab2c4da2-2478-fae8-944c-10e1e1f16e49@intel.com>
On Mon, 22 May 2023 11:19:24 +0100
"Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > This case validates mbuf. IMO there is no need to do validation in a secondary process.
> > Unit test for rte_panic() also uses fork() and could have the same issue.
> >
>
> In that case, rte_panic() test should be fixed as well.
>
> My concern is that ideally, we shouldn't intentionally crash the test
> app if something goes wrong, and calling rte_panic() accomplishes just
> that - which is why I suggested running them in secondary processes
> instead, so that any call into rte_panic happens inside a secondary
> process, and the main test process doesn't crash even if the test has
> failed.
>
All forks outside of EAL are bad. The test should be removed, it was buggy
when first written.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-22 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-22 6:01 [PATCH] test/mbuf: fix the forked process segment fault Ruifeng Wang
2023-05-22 9:24 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2023-05-22 9:55 ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-05-22 10:19 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2023-05-22 15:21 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2023-05-22 15:37 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2023-05-23 3:45 ` Ruifeng Wang
2023-05-23 10:12 ` Burakov, Anatoly
2023-06-12 14:47 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=20230522082159.452ae26c@hermes.local \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=Justin.He@arm.com \
--cc=Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com \
--cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.