From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto/scheduler: fix possible duplicated
	ring names
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 09:42:27 +0000
Message-ID: <E115CCD9D858EF4F90C690B0DCB4D8976CD0C205@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20180514100927.78088-1-roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Rybalchenko, Kirill" <kirill.rybalchenko@intel.com>, "stable@dpdk.org"
 <stable@dpdk.org>
To: "Zhang, Roy Fan" <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180514100927.78088-1-roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
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>

Hi Fan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhang, Roy Fan
> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 11:09 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>; Rybalchenko, Kirill
> <kirill.rybalchenko@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] crypto/scheduler: fix possible duplicated ring names
>=20
> Fixes: 4c07e0552f0a ("crypto/scheduler: add multicore scheduling mode")

Fixes line goes before "Signed-off-by" and after the description of the pat=
ch.
Also, CC: stable@dpdk.org should go after Fixes line.

>=20
> This patch fixes the possible duplicated ring names in multi-core schedul=
er.
> Originally two or more multi-core schedulers may have same worker ring na=
mes
> thus will cause initialization error.
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Fan Zhang <roy.fan.zhang@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_multicore.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_multicore.c
> b/drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_multicore.c
> index 644426e93..cd71d18ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_multicore.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/scheduler/scheduler_multicore.c
> @@ -347,14 +347,18 @@ scheduler_create_private_ctx(struct rte_cryptodev
> *dev)
>  	for (i =3D 0; i < sched_ctx->nb_wc; i++) {
>  		char r_name[16];
>=20
> -		snprintf(r_name, sizeof(r_name),
> MC_SCHED_ENQ_RING_NAME_PREFIX "%u", i);
> +		snprintf(r_name, sizeof(r_name),
> +				MC_SCHED_ENQ_RING_NAME_PREFIX "%u",
> +				sched_ctx->wc_pool[i]);

We could potentially have 2 scheduler sharing same cores, right?
I mean, performance wise, it doesn't make sense, but it should still work.
In this case, it wouldn't work, so we might need a different name.
I'd say using the scheduler id and the index "i" should work.

Thanks,
Pablo