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 42730A04B3; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:51:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD121BFA4; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:51:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 794BF1BFA0 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:51:47 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1573203106; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Cb0RjeNAfYwcxnnRrN918o0IOP/MZuWg5kPm1cwOvRE=; b=cygxciikIgijHZaZ068atI75OO1JuCujdfuGScMbSoKGRsD8xAv6oJd77Zh79jlV//or+4 pFjHecvrrrCIKtIao6cC+CYlgqgThjcaadzflUdcYXouhdXATnVskLzdzm2LmnYGnfdQs0 Lt7tc8GReDznT8kxVBvKPFhJod2ryOk= Received: from mail-ua1-f71.google.com (mail-ua1-f71.google.com [209.85.222.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-395--FAy8Q0NO5qK4bFiB28FKQ-1; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 03:51:43 -0500 Received: by mail-ua1-f71.google.com with SMTP id b12so2053569uan.10 for ; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:51:43 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=oMJMyoJYWOELpVIBpLI+0Y5j9xaUf8CF1rzP3/4aFwE=; b=gzb7/WnayH1frNrmx9oenwiS89FLdPomrCG8SZQQBxst+/lPdklgoGJgIoVsr+vHst IvfUMEjf1rgKuBYU8TvGGk1ut3XzeYrS2CCfYhmbPMojk9jKj5bVoj+kO2JClp3NHRnv YLNsdheHbddFTtLY54xi49TOKp0AGp/tvGR4pBgpIH7IK0R4p1cIUiJ8EiRSsrRT1kOS Hs2TDGp5DU3bDB0DCrQnGBnZem6Ixn0W9fzsR8Q0RqeeImKWv0PbejWhKzVhOkoL91R0 6V57sWowepaHnwh+z6oCaCLZk/UaKyM068JGzZjBoQklc/kLVC3ZwB1QO6JL70/QTaYw I4Jg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXoHcbKwhKvnY+Hg6sceS+eDPrPCZI+7jgcsdBCfb87Is4S4Wg3 W9OQU0SJvsO3kgE0hZotVcXI3eQ0xDmICYe4M/AtbQ6XyCi7hAc2fI26I2teqgHYh9oS3UeNb5K S5IZvJ3mJcDI5JAKTGeU= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:189a:: with SMTP id t26mr6204493uag.87.1573203102947; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:51:42 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyEG6TAAqgYXfrC33U7rMIYZkc1LR1USmsM/jqvHwJVLS4SGnJCX4JXd93r/IsWxWWqvKLyzgdd9i7xOswvNlA= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:189a:: with SMTP id t26mr6204471uag.87.1573203102595; Fri, 08 Nov 2019 00:51:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191030052318.1167-1-pbhagavatula@marvell.com> In-Reply-To: <20191030052318.1167-1-pbhagavatula@marvell.com> From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:51:31 +0100 Message-ID: To: Pavan Nikhilesh Cc: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , Marko Kovacevic , Ori Kam , Bruce Richardson , Radu Nicolau , Akhil Goyal , Tomasz Kantecki , dev X-MC-Unique: -FAy8Q0NO5qK4bFiB28FKQ-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] examples/l3fwd: increase number of routes 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" On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 6:23 AM wrote: > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh > > Increase the number of routes from 8 to 16 that are statically added for > lpm and em mode as most of the SoCs support more than 8 interfaces. > > Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh > --- > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_lpm.c | 16 +++++++++ > 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c b/examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c > index 74a7c8fa4..c07a5b937 100644 > --- a/examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c > +++ b/examples/l3fwd/l3fwd_em.c > @@ -103,6 +103,18 @@ static struct ipv4_l3fwd_em_route ipv4_l3fwd_em_rout= e_array[] =3D { > {{RTE_IPV4(201, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 20, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 1}, > {{RTE_IPV4(111, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 30, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 2}, > {{RTE_IPV4(211, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 40, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 3}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(121, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 10, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 4}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(221, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 20, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 5}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(131, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 30, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 6}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(231, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 40, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 7}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(141, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 30, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 8}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(241, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 40, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 9}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(151, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 30, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 10}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(251, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 40, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 11}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(161, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(100, 30, 0, 1), 101, 11, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 12}, > + {{RTE_IPV4(261, 0, 0, 0), RTE_IPV4(200, 40, 0, 1), 102, 12, IPPR= OTO_TCP}, 13}, Am I reading this correctly ? 261.0.0.0 ? --=20 David Marchand