From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tetsuya Mukawa <mukawa@igel.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/9] null: fix segfault when null_pmd added
 to bonding
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 19:32:58 +0900
Message-ID: <560A68DA.4060309@igel.co.jp>
References: <1435589444-1988-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
 <1436981189-3320-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
 <1436981189-3320-3-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
 <5609F65A.6050208@igel.co.jp>
 <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14DF7A48@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Kulasek, TomaszX" <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pa0-f49.google.com (mail-pa0-f49.google.com
 [209.85.220.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81245683
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:33:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by pablk4 with SMTP id lk4so2777752pab.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 03:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14DF7A48@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://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: <http://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 2015/09/29 18:39, Kulasek, TomaszX wrote:
> Hi Tetsuya,
>
>> Thanks for extending null pmd features.
>> Is it possible to use rte_null_pmd here?
>> Could you please check ring pmd? It may also uses rte_ring_pmd for link
>> status callback.
>>
>> Tetsuya
> My first attempt was to use ring pmd, and there's no such an issue with it. It works pretty well in bonding.
>
> Tomasz.

HI Tomasz,


Sorry, my English is wrong.
'rte_null_pmd' is defined like below.

static struct eth_driver rte_null_pmd = {
        .pci_drv = {
                .name = "rte_null_pmd",
                .drv_flags = RTE_PCI_DRV_DETACHABLE,
        },
};

I guess you may be able to use 'rte_null_pmd' instead of allocating one
more eth_driver structure like below.

    struct eth_driver *eth_drv = NULL;
    eth_drv = rte_zmalloc_socket(name, sizeof(*eth_drv), 0, numa_node);

Is it possible to use 'rte_null_pmd'?

Tetsuya