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 8BA61A00E6 for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 19:01:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3482E1BC14; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 19:01:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB0071BC13 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 19:01:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Apr 2019 10:01:42 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,370,1549958400"; d="scan'208";a="150776047" Received: from irsmsx106.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.31]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Apr 2019 10:01:41 -0700 Received: from irsmsx101.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.115]) by IRSMSX106.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.8.235]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 18:01:41 +0100 From: "Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com> To: "Jozwiak, TomaszX" <tomaszx.jozwiak@intel.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> CC: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>, "yskoh@mellanox.com" <yskoh@mellanox.com>, "Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/compress: fix max mbuf size test case Thread-Index: AQHU9pZEd60Gfe+5YEG4XvSwYvIVE6ZDNDsAgAAj9AT///IkAIAAA+GAgAAGrACAAF7MIA== Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 17:01:40 +0000 Message-ID: <348A99DA5F5B7549AA880327E580B435897461FF@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1555667827-3715-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.jozwiak@intel.com> <3955282.IgHOaonqCx@xps> <CA70B6012E3ADB4184D44E025E5FF01B6A20B909@LCSMSX155.ger.corp.intel.com> <1749599.B640tvC1p7@xps> <CA70B6012E3ADB4184D44E025E5FF01B6A20B985@LCSMSX155.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <CA70B6012E3ADB4184D44E025E5FF01B6A20B985@LCSMSX155.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiYmE3MDI5OGYtMThjMi00N2RmLTllZDAtNTM4ODg5Y2ZkZTU2IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiY1liRHozU2Z2OUZ2N2tUNmNcL1NoazNRZmk2ZlFGOU40SmZFUFdwQytQV1JJbjVubVhTWE5iK1ErcnBOSWVDTjcifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.600.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/compress: fix max mbuf size test case 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> Message-ID: <20190419170140.WUSTqxANKeqaJ9ROK8GEOTtwXC2WpSSezsdz2oNl498@z> Hi Thomas et al, > -----Original Message----- > From: Jozwiak, TomaszX > Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 1:14 PM > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; david.m= archand@redhat.com; > Trahe, Fiona <fiona.trahe@intel.com>; yskoh@mellanox.com; Cel, TomaszX <t= omaszx.cel@intel.com> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/compress: fix max mbuf size test cas= e [Fiona] Sorry for all the hassle. I've reviewed the related code and fix. In my opinion the original fix was ok to resolve the compile issue, which=20 we missed due to using a different compiler version and also missed spotting in code review. We'll be more careful in future. I've sent a v3 with a small tweak to help the code clarity. This is consistent with a bunch of other tests in same file.