From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: fix rte_intr_dp_is_en() check Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:41:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2847845.SJj9hZrsaB@xps13> References: <1468542971-48198-1-git-send-email-yongwang@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: Yong Wang , dev@dpdk.org, "david.marchand@6wind.com" To: "Liang, Cunming" Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D6D377C for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:41:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id o80so57642347wme.1 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:41:58 -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" 2016-07-20 07:03, Liang, Cunming: > Probably a clean way is not to handle device external interrupt event in EAL > interrupt thread (intr mb may have some problem). The EAL interrupt thread is > only used to postpone the delay execution or other background interrupt > (e.g. alarm). Then misc/non-misc can be combined, while requiring APP to > detect the interrupt causes. I am not sure it was a good idea to have a thread for the link interrupt. It may be simpler and cleaner to let the application do the pthread_create.