[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: fix unlock in rte_eal_memzone_init

[Gao Feng]

At 2018-12-06 17:09:23, "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:
>On 06-Dec-18 12:47 AM, gfree.wind at vip.163.com wrote:
>> From: Gao Feng <davidfgao at tencent.com>
>> 
>> The RTE_PROC_PRIMARY error handler lost the unlock statement in the
>> current codes. Now fix it.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <davidfgao at tencent.com>
>
>Fixes: 49df3db84883 ("memzone: replace memzone array with fbarray")
>Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>
>> ---
>>   lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memzone.c | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memzone.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memzone.c
>> index b7081af..649cad4 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memzone.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_memzone.c
>> @@ -375,6 +375,7 @@
>>   			rte_fbarray_init(&mcfg->memzones, "memzone",
>>   			RTE_MAX_MEMZONE, sizeof(struct rte_memzone))) {
>>   		RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Cannot allocate memzone list\n");
>> +		rte_rwlock_write_unlock(&mcfg->mlock);
>>   		return -1;
>>   	} else if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_SECONDARY &&
>>   			rte_fbarray_attach(&mcfg->memzones)) {
>> 
>
>Acked-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
>
>Although i would probably remove both unlocks and instead save and 

>return a value, so that unlock happens in one place. But this is OK too.


> Thanks Anatoly. 


Thanks Anatoly's review.
I also prefer keep unlock in one place. 
As a new guy, finally I choose just a fix with a minor change. I would do better next time.


And could I ask you one question, Anatoly?


I sent another dpdk patch with wrong git-send-email command, "git send-email -1 --to dev at dpdk.org patch_xxxx".
As a result, it generated another wrong reply and email thread.


I don't know if i need to send v2 patch to correct it then?
Its url is https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@dpdk.org/msg119925.html.


Best Regards
Feng


>
>-- 
>Thanks,
>Anatoly