Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] test/eal: fix core check in c flag test

[Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>]

Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> writes:

> The expression for checking which lcore is enabled for 0-7
> was wrong (missing case for 6).
>
> Link: https://pvs-studio.com/en/blog/posts/cpp/1179/
>
> Fixes: b0209034f2bb ("test/eal: check number of cores before running subtests")
> Cc: msantana@redhat.com
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>

>  app/test/test_eal_flags.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> index d37d6b8627..e32f83d3c8 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_eal_flags.c
> @@ -677,8 +677,8 @@ test_missing_c_flag(void)
>  
>  	if (rte_lcore_is_enabled(0) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(1) &&
>  	    rte_lcore_is_enabled(2) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(3) &&
> -	    rte_lcore_is_enabled(3) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(5) &&
> -	    rte_lcore_is_enabled(4) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(7) &&
> +	    rte_lcore_is_enabled(4) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(5) &&
> +	    rte_lcore_is_enabled(6) && rte_lcore_is_enabled(7) &&
>  	    launch_proc(argv29) != 0) {
>  		printf("Error - "
>  		       "process did not run ok with valid corelist value\n");