[dpdk-dev] [Bug 83] For RSS flow actions, e1000_ethdev.h uses IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM instead of IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM_82576

[dpdk-dev] [Bug 83] For RSS flow actions, e1000_ethdev.h uses IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM instead of IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM_82576

[bugzilla]

https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83

            Bug ID: 83
           Summary: For RSS flow actions, e1000_ethdev.h uses
                    IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM instead of
                    IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM_82576
           Product: DPDK
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: CONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: Normal
         Component: ethdev
          Assignee: dev@dpdk.org
          Reporter: dpdk@stormmq.com
  Target Milestone: ---

NOTE: This report needs to be confirmed by someone who is familiar with this
code.

When using the rss_flow_action, the `queue_num` needs to be specified. The only
indication of what the maximum value for this is from
`rte_eth_dev_info.max_rx_queues`. This seems to work for all PMDs that support
this flow action *except* for the 82576 variant of e1000.

This is because at line 239, the 'queue' parameter of struct
igb_rte_flow_rss_conf is defined as IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM, yet this device
reports its maximum queue size as being the same as IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM_82576
in `rte_eth_dev_info.max_rx_queues` - although it doesn't reference the same
constant.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

[dpdk-dev] [Bug 83] For RSS flow actions, e1000_ethdev.h uses IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM instead of IGB_MAX_RX_QUEUE_NUM_82576

[bugzilla]

https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83

Qimingy (qiming.yang@intel.com) changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|CONFIRMED                   |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED
                 CC|                            |qiming.yang@intel.com

--- Comment #2 from Qimingy (qiming.yang@intel.com) ---
has been fixed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.