Hi
> -----Original Message----- > From: Beilei Xing [mailto:beilei.x...@intel.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:35 AM > To: Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: [PATCH v2] examples/flow_filtering: add delay during updating link > status > > Add up to 9s delay for getting link status to make sure NIC updates link > status > successfully, just like other applications such as testpmd and l2fwd. > > Signed-off-by: Beilei Xing <beilei.x...@intel.com> > --- > > v2 changes: > - Add rte_delay_ms(CHECK_INTERVAL) which is missed in v1. > > examples/flow_filtering/main.c | 13 ++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/examples/flow_filtering/main.c b/examples/flow_filtering/main.c > index 4a07b63..85d5727 100644 > --- a/examples/flow_filtering/main.c > +++ b/examples/flow_filtering/main.c > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ > #include <rte_mbuf.h> > #include <rte_net.h> > #include <rte_flow.h> > +#include <rte_cycles.h> > > static volatile bool force_quit; > > @@ -119,13 +120,23 @@ main_loop(void) > rte_eth_dev_close(port_id); > } > > +#define CHECK_INTERVAL 1000 /* 100ms */ > +#define MAX_REPEAT_TIME 90 /* 9s (90 * 100ms) in total */ I know that in other examples there is use of MAX_REPEAT_TIME but don't you think the name is incorrect, It should be called: MAX_REPEAT_TIMES or MAX_REPEAT_COUNT? Since it doesn't represent time but iterations. What do you think? > + > static void > assert_link_status(void) > { > struct rte_eth_link link; > + uint8_t rep_cnt = MAX_REPEAT_TIME; > > memset(&link, 0, sizeof(link)); > - rte_eth_link_get(port_id, &link); > + do { > + rte_eth_link_get(port_id, &link); > + if (link.link_status == ETH_LINK_UP) > + break; > + rte_delay_ms(CHECK_INTERVAL); > + } while (--rep_cnt); > + > if (link.link_status == ETH_LINK_DOWN) > rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, ":: error: link is still down\n"); } > -- > 2.5.5
