On 4/18/19 3:11 AM, David Marchand wrote:
Hello Chas,
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 4:02 PM Chas Williams <3ch...@gmail.com
<mailto:3ch...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I should have some time this weekend to run these patches through our
regression system.
Did you manage to run this series through your tests system ?
There were some other issues over the weekend. Hopefully this one.
On 4/10/19 8:53 AM, David Marchand wrote:
> @@ -357,10 +318,16 @@
> hdr = rte_pktmbuf_mtod(bufs[j], struct
ether_hdr *);
> subtype = ((struct slow_protocol_frame
*)hdr)->slow_protocol.subtype;
>
> - /* Remove packet from array if it is slow
packet or slave is not
> - * in collecting state or bonding interface
is not in promiscuous
> - * mode and packet address does not match. */
> - if
(unlikely(is_lacp_packets(hdr->ether_type, subtype, bufs[j]) ||
> + /* Remove packet from array if:
> + * - it is slow packet but no dedicated rxq
is present,
> + * - slave is not in collecting state,
> + * - bonding interface is not in
promiscuous mode and
> + * packet is not multicast and address
does not match,
> + */
> + if (unlikely(
The coding style checker doesn't like this:
CHECK:OPEN_ENDED_LINE: Lines should not end with a '('
Yes, I had seen this warning, just found it easier to read this way.
> + (!dedicated_rxq &&
> + is_lacp_packets(hdr->ether_type,
subtype,
> + bufs[j])) ||
> !collecting ||
> (!promisc &&
>
!is_multicast_ether_addr(&hdr->d_addr) &&
--
David Marchand
