From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail1.sandvine.com (mail1.sandvine.com [64.7.137.165]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A86929D2 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 17:53:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from WTL-EXCHP-1.sandvine.com ([fe80::ac6b:cc1e:f2ff:93aa]) by WTL-EXCHP-3.sandvine.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:53:28 -0500 From: Kyle Larose To: "Lilijun (Jerry)" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com" CC: "Zhang, Jerry" , Wanghanlin Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/bonding: fix bond 8023ad mode enable using wrong index Thread-Index: AdNhz0mHoFvSw0WoT/aXDV+wmLJQ4gCrAStQ Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:53:27 +0000 Message-ID: References: <40280F65B1B0B44E8089ED31C01616EBA357ADA1@dggeml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <40280F65B1B0B44E8089ED31C01616EBA357ADA1@dggeml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [192.168.200.51] x-c2processedorg: b2f06e69-072f-40ee-90c5-80a34e700794 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/bonding: fix bond 8023ad mode enable using wrong index 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: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:53:29 -0000 Hello, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Lilijun (Jerry) > Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 2:16 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org; tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com > Cc: Zhang, Jerry; Wanghanlin > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/bonding: fix bond 8023ad mode enable > using wrong index >=20 ... > --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_8023ad.c > +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_8023ad.c > @@ -1159,7 +1159,7 @@ > uint8_t i; >=20 > for (i =3D 0; i < internals->active_slave_count; i++) > - bond_mode_8023ad_activate_slave(bond_dev, i); > + bond_mode_8023ad_activate_slave(bond_dev, internals- > >active_slaves[i]); >=20 > return 0; > } >=20 I don't think active_slaves is correct here. The slave is not yet active, s= o it may not be in that array yet. Should we instead use internals->slaves[i].port_id?