From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E2DA0096
	for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2019 14:41:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFBB41BB92;
	Fri,  7 Jun 2019 14:41:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF5C1BB83
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  7 Jun 2019 14:41:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
 [10.5.11.11])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DA862F8BE7;
 Fri,  7 Jun 2019 12:41:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.36.112.53] (ovpn-112-53.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.53])
 by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBBFB7DE39;
 Fri,  7 Jun 2019 12:41:26 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Stillwell Jr, Paul M" <paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com>,
 "Rong, Leyi" <leyi.rong@intel.com>, "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Nowlin, Dan" <dan.nowlin@intel.com>
References: <20190604054248.68510-1-leyi.rong@intel.com>
 <20190604054248.68510-48-leyi.rong@intel.com>
 <020fd028-65d5-7a8e-0591-b4c1c10a427b@redhat.com>
 <F8A4ECA1C1D86B4081DD6BF503D1F436C74B5BCD@fmsmsx120.amr.corp.intel.com>
From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <1ef7ce27-ece5-fb95-309d-5838a638260c@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 14:41:24 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F8A4ECA1C1D86B4081DD6BF503D1F436C74B5BCD@fmsmsx120.amr.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16
 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Fri, 07 Jun 2019 12:41:29 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 47/49] net/ice/base: enable additional switch
 rules
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>



On 6/5/19 6:34 PM, Stillwell Jr, Paul M wrote:
>>>    	if (!s_rule)
>>> @@ -5576,8 +5606,8 @@ ice_add_adv_rule(struct ice_hw *hw, struct
>> ice_adv_lkup_elem *lkups,
>>>    	s_rule->pdata.lkup_tx_rx.recipe_id = CPU_TO_LE16(rid);
>>>    	s_rule->pdata.lkup_tx_rx.act = CPU_TO_LE32(act);
>>>
>>> -	ice_fill_adv_dummy_packet(lkups, lkups_cnt, rinfo->tun_type,
>> s_rule,
>>> -				  pkt, pkt_len);
>>> +	ice_fill_adv_dummy_packet(lkups, lkups_cnt, s_rule, pkt, pkt_len,
>>> +				  pkt_offsets);
>> Now that ice_fill_adv_dummy_packet() propagates an error, the caller
>> should do the same.
>>
> OK, can we accept this patch and have a separate patch that propagates the error? It will take some time to get a patch that propagates the error done.
> 

I'm OK with that, do you think it can be done for v19.08?