[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 22/26] net/bnxt: add code to determine the Rx status of VF

Ajit Khaparde ajit.khaparde at broadcom.com
Thu Jun 1 18:36:05 CEST 2017


On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Ajit,
>
> On 6/1/2017 4:02 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> > This patch adds code to determine the Rx status of a VF.
> > It adds the rte_pmd_bnxt_get_vf_rx_status call, which calculates
> > the VNIC count of the function to get the Rx status.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hurd <stephen.hurd at broadcom.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde at broadcom.com>
>
> <...>
>
> > +int rte_pmd_bnxt_get_tx_drop_count(uint8_t port, uint64_t *count)
> > +{
> > +     struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> > +     struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info;
> > +     struct bnxt *bp;
> > +
> > +     dev = &rte_eth_devices[port];
> > +     if (!is_bnxt_supported(dev))
> > +             return -ENOTSUP;
> > +
> > +     rte_eth_dev_info_get(port, &dev_info);
> > +     bp = (struct bnxt *)dev->data->dev_private;
> > +
> > +     return bnxt_hwrm_func_qstats_tx_drop(bp, 0xffff, count);
> > +}
>
> I guess there is rebasing error here, this function left here and
> causing a build error [1].
> (or function tries to sneak in within another patch :)
>
​Yes. It seems to have. I was actually trying to avoid this and compile
testing
at a minimum during each rebase step to make sure.
But may be the warning message scrolled away.

I am sending a new series.

Thanks
​


>
> [1]
> .../drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c:639:5: error: no previous prototype
> for function 'rte_pmd_bnxt_get_tx_drop_count'
> [-Werror,-Wmissing-prototypes]
> int rte_pmd_bnxt_get_tx_drop_count(uint8_t port, uint64_t *count)
>     ^
>


More information about the dev mailing list