From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Subject: Re: [PATCH] test: test zero socket-mem as valid Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 13:48:25 +0000 Message-ID: <756c04d0-86fd-853d-7f29-6f11a9ec007d@intel.com> References: <20190125075558.27139-1-i.maximets@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Thomas Monjalon , ShuaiX Zhu , Xueqin Lin , WenjieX A Li , FengqinX Wang , dpdk stable To: David Marchand , Ilya Maximets Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 25-Jan-19 9:53 AM, David Marchand wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 9:06 AM Ilya Maximets > wrote: > > On 25.01.2019 10:55, Ilya Maximets wrote: > > Dynamic memory mode allowes zero socket-mem because all the > > required memory could be allocated on demand. > > > > Fixes: 339c2244b4f1 ("eal: fix parsing zero socket memory and > limits") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Reported-by: Shuai Zhu > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilya Maximets > > > > --- > >  test/test/test_eal_flags.c | 6 +++--- > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c > > index e3a60c7ae..81e345b87 100644 > > --- a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c > > +++ b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c > > @@ -1158,7 +1158,7 @@ test_memory_flags(void) > >       const char *argv1[] = {prgname, "-c", "10", "-n", "2", > >                       "--file-prefix=" memtest, "-m", > DEFAULT_MEM_SIZE}; > > > > -     /* invalid (zero) --socket-mem flag */ > > +     /* valid (zero) --socket-mem flag */ > >       const char *argv2[] = {prgname, "-c", "10", "-n", "2", > >                       "--file-prefix=" memtest, > "--socket-mem=0,0,0,0"}; > > > > @@ -1256,8 +1256,8 @@ test_memory_flags(void) > >               printf("Error - process failed with valid -m flag!\n"); > >               return -1; > >       } > > -     if (launch_proc(argv2) == 0) { > > -             printf("Error - process run ok with invalid (zero) > --socket-mem!\n"); > > +     if (launch_proc(argv2) != 0) { > > +             printf("Error - process failed with valid (zero) > --socket-mem!\n"); > >               return -1; > >       } > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: David Marchand > > > > -- > David Marchand Now that i think of it, maybe it's not that simple. --socket-mem/-m flag with zero is still an invalid value *if* --legacy-mem is involved. However, it is a valid value in non-legacy mode. So maybe the test should reflect this, and the previous fix should have instead added a check for legacy mode rather than disabling the zero check outright. -- Thanks, Anatoly