From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E081A04B6; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:57:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892152142; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:57:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED19A2AB; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:57:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2C8A441; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:57:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:57:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=gfz1JaSl4mun5etKWR57TDh+kj+wXT/japd2A5JNFT8=; b=pbpLrj+mJmM4 YuHnb2h4RXpEw7wER2F6Dij8/IxlUCM210CGPTkY1YqqQZ80Wgi3/RGhDoIcjxHd yZ/08dRJsarav+HpQ6CYzsNxzXevBSiSiHInO/ODbVEIkLE+oTAqVuw8nr6WwSxj 8GrKfsoamQYMr3lbvge9npdqekBOMNU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=gfz1JaSl4mun5etKWR57TDh+kj+wXT/japd2A5JNF T8=; b=bkoryqC3xMhvYSKqf91BipeIdln+70M5dbvfzlgzsrNhIojdpgWSOPrKP muDrNa2GT7nNzWAvwyTdDQohJhTa+3XloDtQ+lttu1BN0D3ISoekWeXkk1IXMkBX ZtuXzRkNvNYwvI2cnvi87z2h1R0Fr+j11tO1hg1QGQ56EjnYZ8KNrbCOO44M+Bqr UHTQsG4Y9ljDs0xg0a8+Pz+kpRtpOH58rSmYJNzqwsFQcVTIk99+0qAdbg6VFZ/I DutKhV2JA/zD3AL1PIq6uqVrp/ldmINKxAogDrBBVsu43MDgvShhdxPxJTPT0FVO 0+CQ1VHnyRcHSATO7Hw3lV26cCLJQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedruddvjedgkeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeefjedrudejfedrgeejrddufeeinecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhho mhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (unknown [37.173.47.136]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B3C49306005C; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 10:57:31 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Sachin Saxena Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:57:22 +0100 Message-ID: <2597413.12N5DsGnAP@xps> In-Reply-To: <20191111153614.12079-1-sachin.saxena@nxp.com> References: <20191111153614.12079-1-sachin.saxena@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] net/dpaa2: fixes issue of accidentally resetting rx offloads flags X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 11/11/2019 16:36, Sachin Saxena: > The JUMBO frame handling in dpaa2_dev_mtu_set api was not correct. > When frame_size is greater than RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN, the > intention is to add JUMBO flag in rx offload while it was resetting > all other flags other than JUMBO as AND operator was used instead of OR. Hi, About the title of this patch: - "fixes" should be "fix" (infinitive verb) - "issue" is not needed after "fix" - we don't care whether it is "accidentally resetting" You should just tell what is fixed and what is the case: fix Rx offload flags on jumbo MTU set