From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] eal: replace rte_panic instances in
 init sequence
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 16:32:36 +0300
Message-ID: <CAKy9EB2a8gQLk2sNsksN4r6K=gSXhtGyWwMWn0z6pBsg-biEwQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1524117669-25729-1-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com>
 <1524117669-25729-11-git-send-email-arnon@qwilt.com>
 <d162912b-d8b8-8f6e-ab92-27d205f51baa@intel.com>
 <CAKy9EB3Zzp0wogQpESYC3xnzcSf7PNpyR-Fvr9vSACeAs0DTtA@mail.gmail.com>
 <93afdd1b-b108-9986-5fbe-7d3aacc92ca3@intel.com>
 <f10c7dba-6ef8-1ba1-b54c-5701382323ca@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, "Doherty,
 Declan" <declan.doherty@intel.com>,
 jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
To: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-it0-f52.google.com (mail-it0-f52.google.com
 [209.85.214.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBC1ED148
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:32:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 71-v6so2496074ith.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 06:32:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <f10c7dba-6ef8-1ba1-b54c-5701382323ca@redhat.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>

Agree. As I wrote below - I will put this instance back in place for this
patchset and handle it on a different one

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 04/19/2018 03:57 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> > On 19-Apr-18 3:48 PM, Arnon Warshavsky wrote:
> >> Copy on the commit message  and volatile.
> >>
> >> Regarding the new function defunct_and_remain_in_endless_loop ()
> >> I don't think I can put that in a separate patch without breaking the
> >> current patch independence.
> >
> > How so?
> >
> > Just leave some panic instances in there for thread-related stuff and
> > fix them up in the next patch.
> >
> > Also, i'm not sure sending threads into an infinite loop on panic is
> > such a good idea. You might want to look at Olivier's approach [1] to
> > creating threads, using pthread_barriers and pthread_kill/cancel.
> >
>
> I haven't reviewed this one yet, but going into an infinite loop doesn't
> seem like the right thing to do.
>
> > This does warrant a separate patch now :)
> >
>
>


-- 

*Arnon Warshavsky*
*Qwilt | work: +972-72-2221634 | mobile: +972-50-8583058 | arnon@qwilt.com
<arnon@qwilt.com>*