On 6/27/2025 12:46 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
27/06/2025 12:44, Thomas Monjalon:
20/06/2025 15:37, Bruce Richardson:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 02:30:23PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
This issue was reported by static analysis. It is a false positive,
because both `rte_socket_count` and `rte_soc
27/06/2025 12:44, Thomas Monjalon:
> 20/06/2025 15:37, Bruce Richardson:
> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 02:30:23PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
> > > This issue was reported by static analysis. It is a false positive,
> > > because both `rte_socket_count` and `rte_socket_id_by_idx` only report
> > >
20/06/2025 15:37, Bruce Richardson:
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 02:30:23PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
> > This issue was reported by static analysis. It is a false positive,
> > because both `rte_socket_count` and `rte_socket_id_by_idx` only report
> > information about physical sockets, and these
This issue was reported by static analysis. It is a false positive,
because both `rte_socket_count` and `rte_socket_id_by_idx` only report
information about physical sockets, and these specific calls are made
during EAL initialization, so no other sockets (i.e. external) could have
been available,
On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 02:30:23PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
> This issue was reported by static analysis. It is a false positive,
> because both `rte_socket_count` and `rte_socket_id_by_idx` only report
> information about physical sockets, and these specific calls are made
> during EAL initia
5 matches
Mail list logo