Message ID | 1453203972-24855-3-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded, archived |
Delegated to: | Thomas Monjalon |
Headers |
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> X-Original-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DF3E8E91; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:46:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com (mail-pa0-f50.google.com [209.85.220.50]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4478E8E for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:46:38 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id yy13so357631165pab.3 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:46:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mvista-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references; bh=vhMlJRtT5PYETMDbNncOT662aoGaiLlS8pVD1L58esE=; b=fExHm59KCg56AQxDi7QIkFRKY3M7GcDzeCx9UXsmPuEN/WVfJnDL/nU871i3r/ZRD2 y2CUs48qtut+HGpgx28f78Q7w8wDyw7/uiMbUkGVFZHjjYVT0j11ffIL5fJv0dxCI5mx YbnyHaT3M2K1RceFP6D+EQSSN70FsvTzQMVrcxNmYAdZSua872E3Hwl2/dDIb43Wnmkn UNUw1mOZA4ohv+FhmE0+W0nXSzKk5zfhNQLlOavQl/4wC7uul7nsTbgY3DMvintiZtnY wRTdYFAmUiMSUF7nv54ofXaVzQZwa4yfolZlDYzusibjTY+5/R3BCZZWRFJfiIft380M MoXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references; bh=vhMlJRtT5PYETMDbNncOT662aoGaiLlS8pVD1L58esE=; b=SMAaTrdo7Yvee4r/CqCZRN8waj7M/kuRYTtGFEG7P52i59Rov8h/tAKAJ9ZZsvUGNc BIr6cAk3/X67/OmlG8jrSAkzvVxJxQkaRWNFglzlbw0eKaeVVFuxor5gWlXyoWnt1U7V u0XUqeZ7nLaYtf3gzmGh2QO+D09Qi42XQt9o/MTxRSgsICNaYxTM20Mu06a71IO6MguL c2hyD9yrWaY/0e4TebUGhxVbuiPlol6+JO9W2+Ic0p/j1DKvWGFDhUaEW/y5FvmvHhzE DWI1k0UVKfqWr0fL2Vidv7y17nwAd3gHZkVTRSfc7QyMq06VSipBQs1ES/p+zuItEtSZ sFJg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnmfJMu01dsEf3UXxI2pVr7XCZsQrZ0v0RU6PZgFblrCSRpNceanFblNxjJ3YPJ/BQKqY6j5R98AyO0kriNtoHTS4SSMA== X-Received: by 10.66.102.8 with SMTP id fk8mr43296964pab.24.1453203998135; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:46:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from santosh-Latitude-E5530-non-vPro.mvista.com ([111.93.218.67]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 75sm41014170pfj.20.2016.01.19.03.46.34 (version=TLS1_1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:46:37 -0800 (PST) From: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> To: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:16:03 +0530 Message-Id: <1453203972-24855-3-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.9.5 In-Reply-To: <1453203972-24855-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com> References: <1453203972-24855-1-git-send-email-sshukla@mvista.com> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 02/11] linuxapp: eal: arm: Always return 0 for rte_eal_iopl_init() X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list 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> |
Commit Message
Santosh Shukla
Jan. 19, 2016, 11:46 a.m. UTC
iopl() syscall not supported in linux-arm/arm64 so always return 0 value. Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> Acked-by: Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> Suggested-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> --- lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Comments
Hello Santosh, On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> wrote: > iopl() syscall not supported in linux-arm/arm64 so always return 0 value. > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> > Acked-by: Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> > Suggested-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> I suppose when we will have more arches, this can be rewritten so that iopl() check is only applied to x86 and all other arches get a 0 return. How about such commit title ? "eal/linux: never check iopl for arm" Regards,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:11 PM, David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com> wrote: > Hello Santosh, > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> > wrote: > > iopl() syscall not supported in linux-arm/arm64 so always return 0 value. > > > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <sshukla@mvista.com> > > Acked-by: Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> > > Suggested-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> > > I suppose when we will have more arches, this can be rewritten so that > iopl() check is only applied to x86 and all other arches get a 0 > return. > > Thats correct. And which is why I am holding my other patchset which actually move rte_eal_xx_iopl() stuff into arch specifics. I don't wanted to mix two topic in this series. Waiting for this series to get merged then abstract things like, iopl() and move "sys/io.h" in arch specifics and get rid of few ifdef X86 clutter across dpdk code. > How about such commit title ? > "eal/linux: never check iopl for arm" > even better, sending v6 change for this patch now, Thanks! > > > Regards, > -- > David Marchand >
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c index 635ec36..a2a3485 100644 --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal.c @@ -715,6 +715,8 @@ rte_eal_iopl_init(void) if (iopl(3) != 0) return -1; return 0; +#elif defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM) || defined(RTE_ARCH_ARM64) + return 0; /* iopl syscall not supported for ARM/ARM64 */ #else return -1; #endif