[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[Ian Stokes]

The qos_meter sample app will fail to compile if APP_MODE
is set to APP_MODE_FWD. This patch changes the variable
name 'color' in main.h to the expected variable name
'input_color' to allow compilation with APP_MODE_FWD.

Signed-off-by: Ian Stokes <ian.stokes@intel.com>
---
 examples/qos_meter/main.h |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/examples/qos_meter/main.h b/examples/qos_meter/main.h
index 530bf69..08fbcb9 100644
--- a/examples/qos_meter/main.h
+++ b/examples/qos_meter/main.h
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ enum policer_action policer_table[e_RTE_METER_COLORS][e_RTE_METER_COLORS] =
 
 #if APP_MODE == APP_MODE_FWD
 
-#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) color, flow_id=flow_id, pkt_len=pkt_len, time=time
+#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) input_color, flow_id=flow_id, pkt_len=pkt_len, time=time
 #define FUNC_CONFIG(a,b)
 #define PARAMS	app_srtcm_params
 #define FLOW_METER int
-- 
1.7.4.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[Mcnamara, John]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ian Stokes
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:55 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD
> 
> The qos_meter sample app will fail to compile if APP_MODE is set to
> APP_MODE_FWD. This patch changes the variable name 'color' in main.h to
> the expected variable name 'input_color' to allow compilation with
> APP_MODE_FWD.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Stokes <ian.stokes@intel.com>


Acked-by: John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[Thomas Monjalon]

2015-08-18 16:55, Ian Stokes:
> The qos_meter sample app will fail to compile if APP_MODE
> is set to APP_MODE_FWD. This patch changes the variable
> name 'color' in main.h to the expected variable name
> 'input_color' to allow compilation with APP_MODE_FWD.

Thanks for raising the issue.

> --- a/examples/qos_meter/main.h
> +++ b/examples/qos_meter/main.h
>  #if APP_MODE == APP_MODE_FWD
>  
> -#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) color, flow_id=flow_id, pkt_len=pkt_len, time=time
> +#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) input_color, flow_id=flow_id, pkt_len=pkt_len, time=time

This patch should not be accepted to discourage build-time options.
Patch for run-time option is welcome.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[Mcnamara, John]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 1:37 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD
> 
> > --- a/examples/qos_meter/main.h
> > +++ b/examples/qos_meter/main.h
> >  #if APP_MODE == APP_MODE_FWD
> >
> > -#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) color, flow_id=flow_id, pkt_len=pkt_len,
> > time=time
> > +#define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) input_color, flow_id=flow_id,
> > +pkt_len=pkt_len, time=time
> 
> This patch should not be accepted to discourage build-time options.
> Patch for run-time option is welcome.

Hi,

The patch is fixing a compilation issue, which seems reasonable. It isn't introducing a build time option, it is merely fixing an typo in an existing one.

Yes, it would be better not to have this build time option (in which case the issue would have been found sooner) but that isn't the responsibility of the person submitting this patch.

That is something that should be pushed back to the author/maintainer.

In the meantime this patch is still valid and should be applied.

John

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] qos_meter: Fix compilation with APP_MODE_FWD

[Thomas Monjalon]

2015-08-25 13:34, Mcnamara, John:
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> > This patch should not be accepted to discourage build-time options.
> > Patch for run-time option is welcome.
> 
> The patch is fixing a compilation issue, which seems reasonable. It isn't
> introducing a build time option, it is merely fixing an typo in an
> existing one.

Yes

> Yes, it would be better not to have this build time option (in which case
> the issue would have been found sooner) but that isn't the responsibility
> of the person submitting this patch.

Yes

> That is something that should be pushed back to the author/maintainer.

Yes

> In the meantime this patch is still valid and should be applied.

No
After trying to request this kind of cleanup for several months, nothing
happens. Maybe it will be more efficient to leave bugs until someone
submit a real cleanup.