From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E25D1BB27 for ; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 11:19:48 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jun 2018 02:19:48 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.51,256,1526367600"; d="scan'208";a="69102150" Received: from irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.25]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jun 2018 02:19:46 -0700 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.139]) by irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.15.152]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 10:19:45 +0100 From: "Iremonger, Bernard" To: Stephen Hemminger , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] examples/l3fwd: use reserved IPv4/IPv6 addresses Thread-Index: AQHUB0xvd1kW5NYNp0mGzDojsh/Vx6RsBIQQ Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:19:45 +0000 Message-ID: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C260CB7148@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20180618213557.15209-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20180618213557.15209-3-stephen@networkplumber.org> In-Reply-To: <20180618213557.15209-3-stephen@networkplumber.org> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMGUzYjhmZDktYzc2My00ZjM2LTlhNTMtZTg2N2RhMTM5OWNmIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoiMzVpWFQrTG1VQzZOZ3dJU0NBMUR5SVwvZ1ZSSStSaTN5WmQ4c3JFVzlNck1ZNUpPNDhcL0tOanFudzdnZlgyMjBvIn0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.200.100 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] examples/l3fwd: use reserved IPv4/IPv6 addresses 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:19:49 -0000 Hi Stephen, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 10:36 PM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Stephen Hemminger > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] examples/l3fwd: use reserved IPv4/IPv6 > addresses >=20 > The example should use the IPv4 addresses defined in RFC5735 and the IPv6 > addresses defined in RFC5180 for the L3 forwarding example Longest Prefix > Match table. >=20 > Fixes: 268888b5b020 ("examples/l3fwd: modularize") > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > --- > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_lpm.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- >=20 > +/* 2001:0200::/48 is IANA reserved address range for IPv6 benchmarking > +(RFC5180) */ > static struct ipv6_l3fwd_lpm_route ipv6_l3fwd_lpm_route_array[] =3D { > - {{1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 0}, > - {{2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 1}, > - {{3, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 2}, > - {{4, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 3}, > - {{5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 4}, > - {{6, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 5}, > - {{7, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 6}, > - {{8, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1}, 48, 7}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 64, 0}, Should the depth value of 48 be used instead of 64 in the lines above? > + {{32, 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}, 48, 0}, Should 20 be used instead of 32 in the lines above ? > }; >=20 > #define IPV4_L3FWD_LPM_NUM_ROUTES \ > -- > 2.17.1