On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> Thanks, merged.
>
> I think after some time of stable pass we can remove enable/disable
> option. A lot of options makes it nightmare to test all combinations.
Agreed, but let's discuss that at a future ARCH call post MS-1.
>
> Maxim.
>
> O
Thanks, merged.
I think after some time of stable pass we can remove enable/disable
option. A lot of options makes it nightmare to test all combinations.
Maxim.
On 12/16/16 21:11, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
>> clang is more clever on setting and
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 8:27 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> clang is more clever on setting and not using variables,
> so it traps compilation. Also buffers header almost everywhere
> reference by pointer so size of it should not impact on
> performance.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov
Reviewed-and-t
clang is more clever on setting and not using variables,
so it traps compilation. Also buffers header almost everywhere
reference by pointer so size of it should not impact on
performance.
Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov
---
platform/linux-generic/include/odp_buffer_internal.h | 7 +++
platform/
Just looked one more again into that and looks like this function was
rewritten in api-next. So after merge to master there should be no issue.
Maxim.
On 12/16/16 17:18, Mike Holmes wrote:
> There is a parallel internal thread Bill, I will FWD it to you on this
> topic.
> The argument against is
There is a parallel internal thread Bill, I will FWD it to you on this
topic.
The argument against is that it means that by definition we dont support
upstream long therm supported distributions becasue that is how they ship
and we can't fix them so we have to work around.
On 16 December 2016 at
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> ping.
>
> Our CI still fails on 32 bit compilation. But I tested in latest Ubuntu
> that 32 bits work well. So I think it's better to update CI image.
I believe when I researched this a few months back I found a tirade by
Linus against the "b
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> On 12/16/16 11:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>>>
>>> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
>>> {
>>> int i;
>>> pool_t *pool;
>>> +char ring_name[ODP_POOL_NAME_LEN];
>>>
>>> for (i = 0; i <
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> On 12/16/16 11:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>>>
>>> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
>>> {
>>> int i;
>>> pool_t *pool;
>>> +char ring_name[ODP_POOL_NAME_LEN];
>>>
>>> for (i = 0; i <
On 12/16/16 11:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>>
>> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
>> {
>> int i;
>> pool_t *pool;
>> +char ring_name[ODP_POOL_NAME_LEN];
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < ODP_CONFIG_POOLS; i++) {
>> pool = pool_entry(i);
On 12/16/16 11:06, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote:
>>
>> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
>> {
>> int i;
>> pool_t *pool;
>> +char ring_name[ODP_POOL_NAME_LEN];
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < ODP_CONFIG_POOLS; i++) {
>> pool = pool_entry(i);
ping.
Our CI still fails on 32 bit compilation. But I tested in latest Ubuntu
that 32 bits work well. So I think it's better to update CI image.
Maxim.
On 11/22/16 17:00, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
>
> Does somebody interested in supporting old compilers? I see for example
> our CI fails.
> Changing
On 12/15/16 22:30, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote:
> Thanks. Could you apply it to the monarch branch too?
>
> Nicolas
Done.
>
> Le 12/15/2016 à 08:01 PM, Maxim Uvarov a écrit :
>> Merged,
>> Maxim.
>>
>> On 12/13/16 22:00, Bill Fischofer wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Maxim Uv
Merged,
Maxim.
On 12/15/16 00:31, Bill Fischofer wrote:
> For the v3 series:
>
> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Bill Fischofer
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Maxim Uvarov
>> ---
>> .../linux-generic/include/odp_buffer_internal.h| 10 +-
>> platform/l
On 16 December 2016 at 11:00, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <
petri.savolai...@nokia-bell-labs.com> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of
> Maxim
> > Uvarov
> > Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 8:22 PM
> > To: lng-odp
>
> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
> {
> int i;
> pool_t *pool;
> + char ring_name[ODP_POOL_NAME_LEN];
>
> for (i = 0; i < ODP_CONFIG_POOLS; i++) {
> pool = pool_entry(i);
> @@ -180,6 +181,17 @@ static pool_t *reserve_pool(void)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On Behalf Of Maxim
> Uvarov
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 8:22 PM
> To: lng-odp@lists.linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH v3 01/10] api: crypto: rename
> _params_t to _param_t
>
> Patch set
17 matches
Mail list logo
