Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Fix loss of data stored in udata64 mbuf field

2021-02-04 Thread Thomas Monjalon
04/02/2021 10:17, Michał Krawczyk: > czw., 4 lut 2021 o 10:01 David Marchand > napisał(a): > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 9:52 AM Michal Krawczyk wrote: > > > > > > DPDK v20.11 removed udata64 field, and changed type of the dynfield1 to > > > uint32_t. > > > > > > Due to define: > > > lib/comm

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Fix loss of data stored in udata64 mbuf field

2021-02-04 Thread Michał Krawczyk
czw., 4 lut 2021 o 10:01 David Marchand napisał(a): > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 9:52 AM Michal Krawczyk wrote: > > > > DPDK v20.11 removed udata64 field, and changed type of the dynfield1 to > > uint32_t. > > > > Due to define: > > lib/common/pg_compat.h:#define udata64 dynfield1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Fix loss of data stored in udata64 mbuf field

2021-02-04 Thread David Marchand
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 9:52 AM Michal Krawczyk wrote: > > DPDK v20.11 removed udata64 field, and changed type of the dynfield1 to > uint32_t. > > Due to define: > lib/common/pg_compat.h:#define udata64 dynfield1[0] > the copy of udata64 was in fact copying only the first 32 bits.

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Fix loss of data stored in udata64 mbuf field

2021-02-04 Thread Michal Krawczyk
DPDK v20.11 removed udata64 field, and changed type of the dynfield1 to uint32_t. Due to define: lib/common/pg_compat.h:#define udata64 dynfield1[0] the copy of udata64 was in fact copying only the first 32 bits. Using udata64 as an address is ok, as it will point to the beginni