From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31C6C958E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  7 Dec 2015 09:48:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27])
 by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2015 00:48:22 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,394,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="701637345"
Received: from dwdohert-dpdk.ir.intel.com ([163.33.213.167])
 by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2015 00:48:21 -0800
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, Zhe Tao <zhe.tao@intel.com>
References: <1443524879-24865-1-git-send-email-zhe.tao@intel.com>
 <1932701.vd3GWY9UVx@xps13>
From: Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>
Message-ID: <5665478E.1000200@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 08:47:10 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1932701.vd3GWY9UVx@xps13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/dpdk_qat: Fix RX queue start number
 to the one just received the packets
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 08:48:23 -0000

On 07/12/15 01:32, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-09-29 19:07, Zhe Tao:
>> Every time we started to receive the packets, the start queue number
>> should be the one that just received the packets, should not start from zero!
>>
> [...]
>> -		for (i = 0; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
>> +		for (i = qconf->rx_curr_queue; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
>
> Anyone to confirm?
>

I'll have a look at this this morning Thomas.