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 76574A04B7; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:26:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F14361BF3B; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:26:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7E61BBD7 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:26:24 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1602671183; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=NEn0EIpvtOxDjkG2mXwj/ZMB+yWaU86v3fdvNw25E+w=; b=ElgdVo0n+4gGlmBisZm87UX1TL4tvkvfW+QQQSoIVfH2XPTzeD3DVFlFR8er0FXAAbj3iC kZ4bzepDUL/sJ2dONXljt43h8JbidPr9Ond0wU1QhinMkC3JNoqpWQcSxJo0a5KvUt7TTG 4XUFeEMqP1p9lVGIJvQcIuR1cutyUFU= Received: from mail-vk1-f200.google.com (mail-vk1-f200.google.com [209.85.221.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-495-ueokEb_ZMrGqp1ftZUJlRA-1; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 06:26:21 -0400 X-MC-Unique: ueokEb_ZMrGqp1ftZUJlRA-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id j134so595463vke.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:26:21 -0700 (PDT) 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=NEn0EIpvtOxDjkG2mXwj/ZMB+yWaU86v3fdvNw25E+w=; b=q3onerUBXLdhgkNAoLhikrGcWnflrXC7SNeb2QgdaD5dOQBIrccoB7QWEnbkEYzLOI 0PA/xQ4+b4lZ5VHJeJ3bI289XEkPiV7IZmNMaGhoVUaypM0Ct1smX/XcZg4Ul2xERiGH PxS1pkcXs/nJQQK9ST77Staz/azY/GWwiACHoRKFtrVLYO+gItYzzNGHrHI25HILCsvi ISzQufBBTuucyxa2m2wbaReRxitEvJzD5Fmk4mwowk7IAYJ9MuRn2gVEUtZCpIEnQsHv f/BFG1S9Uk+uN14nlClZLc1Rnza25YCRhATq+h46KuOopmk5z88YI4pbXBNdo3tmGzPj lz7g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531AYSuyvm38OnTEuk4ZN22jNo3h2V9HOFjFukD6H780c5L+uoAI Fky9yJuqO7YFnHTHSUUfeZx61g5iaU01IyxEeusJySxp+PFWNn4d2U+TtHUt/HaWPTqvw2APiGN 2jQQU52z307WQ8tZ7V3o= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:4287:: with SMTP id j7mr2351240uaj.53.1602671180913; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:26:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZl03UJSeZJ8H7WxMtZ78s1ATizEMbI/EX9d5Zg8kpIoXGBAY1au1v/6LWiC08BX+AGqXUnMw1kzIiooF6WsQ= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:4287:: with SMTP id j7mr2351235uaj.53.1602671180696; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:26:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201005184526.7465-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <20201006150316.5776-1-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <20201006150316.5776-14-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20201006150316.5776-14-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 12:26:09 +0200 Message-ID: To: Konstantin Ananyev Cc: dev , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , "Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)" , Vladimir Medvedkin Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 13/14] test/acl: add AVX512 classify support 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 Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 5:13 PM Konstantin Ananyev wrote: > > Add AVX512 classify to the test coverage. > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev > --- > app/test/test_acl.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/app/test/test_acl.c b/app/test/test_acl.c > index 333b347579..5b32347954 100644 > --- a/app/test/test_acl.c > +++ b/app/test/test_acl.c > @@ -278,8 +278,8 @@ test_classify_alg(struct rte_acl_ctx *acx, struct ipv4_7tuple test_data[], > > /* set given classify alg, skip test if alg is not supported */ > ret = rte_acl_set_ctx_classify(acx, alg); > - if (ret == -ENOTSUP) > - return 0; > + if (ret != 0) > + return (ret == -ENOTSUP) ? 0 : ret; Does this really belong to this patch? I would expect it in "test/acl: expand classify test coverage". -- David Marchand