From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] ethdev: synchronize port allocation
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 21:43:47 +0100
Message-ID: <1777810.s1WQivID2Y@xps>
References: <1515318351-4756-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
 <1516293317-30748-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
 <1516293317-30748-5-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
 dev@dpdk.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
 Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378F71B343
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 21:44:22 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <1516293317-30748-5-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

18/01/2018 17:35, Matan Azrad:
>  rte_eth_dev_allocate(const char *name)
>  {
>         uint16_t port_id;
> -       struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev;
> +       struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev = NULL;
> +
> +       /* Synchronize share data one time allocation between local threads. */

I don't understand the "one time" part of this comment.
Please could you try to rephrase it?

> +       rte_spinlock_lock(&rte_eth_share_data_alloc);
> +       if (rte_eth_dev_share_data == NULL)
> +               rte_eth_dev_share_data_alloc();
> +       rte_spinlock_unlock(&rte_eth_share_data_alloc);

I think the correct wording is "shared data", instead of "share data".