[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 17/23] test_table_pipeline: repair munged indirection level

Andy Green andy at warmcat.com
Mon May 14 12:46:13 CEST 2018



On 05/14/2018 06:35 PM, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Andy Green
>> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 6:11 AM
>> To: dev at dpdk.org
>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 17/23] test_table_pipeline: repair munged
>> indirection level
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andy Green <andy at warmcat.com>
>> ---
>>   test/test/test_table_pipeline.c |   12 ++++++------
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/test/test/test_table_pipeline.c b/test/test/test_table_pipeline.c
>> index 5ec4c5244..70dbd25f4 100644
>> --- a/test/test/test_table_pipeline.c
>> +++ b/test/test/test_table_pipeline.c
>> @@ -63,21 +63,21 @@ rte_pipeline_port_out_action_handler
>> port_action_stub(struct rte_mbuf **pkts,
>>
>>   rte_pipeline_table_action_handler_hit
>>   table_action_0x00(struct rte_pipeline *p, struct rte_mbuf **pkts,
>> -	uint64_t pkts_mask, struct rte_pipeline_table_entry **entry, void
>> *arg);
>> +	uint64_t pkts_mask, struct rte_pipeline_table_entry *entry, void
>> +*arg);
> 
> In my opinion , this is wrong fix. Here, table action is meant to be applied on any number of packets (maximum 64), therefore,
> entry parameter should be array of up to 64 pointers to rte_pipeline_table_entry structure. BTW, Dave has already sent
> fix for gcc 8.1 build error.  http://www.dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-May/101113.html


Well, no worries... I saw something was broken (the * vs the **) and 
simply guessed the resolution.

If it's wrong, just drop my patch about this.

-Andy


More information about the dev mailing list