[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/9] eal: don't allow legacy mode with in-memory mode

[Burakov, Anatoly]

On 13-Sep-18 2:06 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> 
> 
> On 09/04/2018 05:15 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
>> In-memory mode was never meant to support legacy mode, because we
>> cannot sort anonymous pages anyway.
>>
>> Fixes: 72b49ff623c4 ("mem: support --in-memory mode")
>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 6 ++++++
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c 
>> b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
>> index dd5f97402..873099acc 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
>> @@ -1390,6 +1390,12 @@ eal_check_common_options(struct internal_config 
>> *internal_cfg)
>>               "--"OPT_HUGE_UNLINK"\n");
>>           return -1;
>>       }
>> +    if (internal_cfg->legacy_mem &&
>> +            internal_cfg->in_memory) {
>> +        RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Option --"OPT_LEGACY_MEM" is not compatible "
>> +                "with --"OPT_IN_MEMORY"\n");
> 
> This is a general comment, as it is consistent with the style of the
> file. I generally prefer not splitting error strings into multiple lines
> even if it is longer than 80 chars, because it makes grepping for the 
> error string more difficult.

I agree in general, however in this particular case the string is 
ungreppable (it is a word now!) anyway because it's split into a few pieces.

> 
>> +        return -1;
>> +    }
>>       return 0;
>>   }
>>
> 
> Other than that:
> Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin at redhat.com>
> 
> Thanks,
> Maxime
> 


-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly