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 inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C985EA0556; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:42:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1A9B25B3; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:42:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6311DBD; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:42:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B47721B88; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 08:42:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 20 Feb 2020 08:42:40 -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=dPy5uyTJ7HLBH07jL22c4iuQ107g/fu8vkCw3/cyf9M=; b=h8HzQ+IhjQ7a x2ht2DDuc0zJ4d+qHEJf6I5BV9lMn5KRULfn8oVqcajuYWP6W1dDz/hK5OPdJD2m 481glft0OTgbcrqw0hrt2FpQ+aIQ5N2ocHpxItcDgyAp+2QP7SQFa8+UNjmXwCdJ DkO43pObgzNPPHLnBradXufqk/5AY4I= 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=fm2; bh=dPy5uyTJ7HLBH07jL22c4iuQ107g/fu8vkCw3/cyf 9M=; b=wa8nf+Cj/S6C2t5/y06xeaIdB/5bltpzyyLKJThjwMcGRY2T9zYMAHReH H1UMYvJQEht4jXskhNbVfkEH1MxLMRo+W4FtwhYUA6woMSiciqHAu777SB1VwdEn nZuz1hHLZnUgC0qWjZ+ZMu8CwlAiAB+0VZYnua+u1rZmPsbdYIGImeacm++2xhzT 3TWAvDJm0xqt+7x6klnrZgn8qGmxhYP+0oHlL/8NjH6loPj0dCzOF0SqSjvPsNnY sh90ks2efe3pGbbi5vk/bdwS0iIC2RRpOhQJgrB0OemvoQ/6v7acJjVu5Ngnpzk2 ZbvfQtsurMuqW24OgWa74BMmIKYLA== X-ME-Sender: <xms:z4xOXqxjVhIi_CkTVgR8oPtgpEk9IlSJVZSHs2UlJcZgRV5uO5Sr6A> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrkedvgdehiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghr rghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:z4xOXmTAJqjuztLjdG3Bf8f4UKSMysGMPBe8CJ_LDTfGjfjZuVIMyQ> <xmx:z4xOXkOrybXAKAxYliFlmlTO_gBmzBWqADFYsP7HimvS5zMBNSIiXg> <xmx:z4xOXvN4CPngtWzFHL-nNmAapIt0LZAUL5EBqMSG7V1sOLcGvzAsjg> <xmx:0IxOXpza0hX01I8pw28P3xG3w7OEIWcVMclt7lWTCiptNjgtYdeq4A> Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3D1973060F09; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 08:42:39 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: Wisam Jaddo <wisamm@mellanox.com> Cc: dev@dpdk.org, rasland@mellanox.com, stable@dpdk.org, olivier.matz@6wind.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:42:38 +0100 Message-ID: <4718348.687JKscXgg@xps> In-Reply-To: <1582204709-7992-1-git-send-email-wisamm@mellanox.com> References: <1582204709-7992-1-git-send-email-wisamm@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] lib/cmdline_rdline: increase command line buf size 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> Hi, About the title, I suggest: cmdline: increase maximum line length 20/02/2020 14:18, Wisam Jaddo: > The current size of buffer is not enough to fit all allowed items/actions, > thus it will block a lot of testing. > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org +Cc maintainers of cmdline and testpmd > Signed-off-by: Wisam Jaddo <wisamm@mellanox.com> [...] > -#define RDLINE_BUF_SIZE 512 > +#define RDLINE_BUF_SIZE 2048 I feel 2k is reasonable. What is the consequence on memory usage? How critical is this change? Which kind of command is so long?