[dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5] eal: fix core number validation
David Marchand
david.marchand at redhat.com
Mon Jan 14 15:39:46 CET 2019
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:31 AM Hari Kumar Vemula <
hari.kumarx.vemula at intel.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
> index 2acab9d69..4dc22ec36 100644
> --- a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
> +++ b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> #include <sys/file.h>
> #include <limits.h>
>
> +#include <rte_per_lcore.h>
> #include <rte_debug.h>
> #include <rte_string_fns.h>
>
> @@ -513,6 +514,16 @@ test_missing_c_flag(void)
> const char *argv25[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
> "-n", "3", "--lcores",
> "0-1,2@(5-7),(3-5)@(0,2),(0,6),7"};
> + /* core number is negative value */
> + const char * const argv26[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
> + "-n", "3", "-l", "-5" };
> + const char * const argv27[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
> + "-n", "3", "-l", "-5-7" };
> + /* core number is maximum value */
> + const char * const argv28[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
> + "-n", "3", "-l", RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
> + const char * const argv29[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
> + "-n", "3", "-l",
> "1-"RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
>
Please move this block with the other "-l" options.
You can add my Reviewed-by tag with this.
Thanks.
--
David Marchand
More information about the stable
mailing list