From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] memzone: improve zero-length memzone
 reserve
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 12:29:08 +0100
Message-ID: <456f4736-856e-3b06-4c8c-a74adfd0b723@intel.com>
References: <777ae6b10a7524e188c07ba14e576fc7b0e21018.1524729978.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <cover.1525366407.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <d0ac8c0cd12fc64b57ef01032228b67d8f0c1d7b.1525366407.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
 <d11632c3-3f7b-cb29-ce6e-b2a83a302ea8@intel.com>
 <952c259e-eb94-0a8d-7966-00e3591f9c37@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: sergio.gonzalez.monroy@intel.com
To: Remy Horton <remy.horton@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0B01C793
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 14 May 2018 13:29:10 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <952c259e-eb94-0a8d-7966-00e3591f9c37@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
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>

On 14-May-18 9:21 AM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> On 11-May-18 11:25 AM, Remy Horton wrote:
>>
>> On 03/05/2018 18:18, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
>> [..]
>>> Also, fixup unit tests to account for the new behavior.
>>
>> Tried running the tests but it fails on a boundary check:
>>
>> RTE>>memzone_autotest
>> test basic memzone API
>> [...]
>> 1GB Huge pages available
>> test alignment for memzone_reserve
>> check alignments and lengths
>> check overlapping
>> test boundary alignment for memzone_reserve
>> check_memzone_bounded(MZ_TEST_bounded_128): invalid memzone boundary 
>> 128 crossed
>> Test Failed
>> RTE>>
>>
> 
> Hi Remy,
> 
> Passes here, but i'll look into it, thanks for the report.
> 

This failure is not caused by this patchset, and you should get similar 
failures on master if you get these while testing my patchset. I am not 
able to reproduce this issue, but i'll double-check the bounded reserve 
code with a fine-toothed comb anyway.

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly