From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Aaron Conole Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: check cpu flags at init Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:42:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1474642051-9973-1-git-send-email-fbl@sysclose.org> <20160927183237.GA27384@plex> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: dpdk To: Flavio Leitner Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FBAE475D for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 22:42:04 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20160927183237.GA27384@plex> (Flavio Leitner's message of "Tue, 27 Sep 2016 15:32:37 -0300") 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" 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. Okay makes sense. Acked-by: Aaron Conole