From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E8FA0540 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:56:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2113640A7B; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:56:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com (smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com [185.125.188.122]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E4F40A7B for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:56:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ed1-f72.google.com (mail-ed1-f72.google.com [209.85.208.72]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-internal-0.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CB933F6F8 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2022 07:56:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1657180613; bh=I2spB+aaamAHnYVhzW8jM9jqRLtvKJz2cNyXAKu8lvc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=j39uHMNWgkVokKNPdgTHt00/QHsnkwyp+pYMQ7rUeQrSjUV647UJElcB/jnX8HBKQ VmJANFl+/X4IycZ6n8sndMUIEkV0o/i64xhZzBxeFPIbLi4A24NVUUAaTUlsy+VUtA cLYRAQEOQb9UJXJdVkwV7aUuQE52Kmg5t5N3w36RHmoZEDuAik+TzJW1NUAqLpPiRw erS9k8N3ivzaaIRprvNBpBoMmZJCgQtDIqDYXcIYkr+P10sB+13O/9XFYljuW6jvJc 0xiYaiuLfM0SX8zz9GJbwQgnLqR8QCWLXxIS99Obexwf+6bs+zLedigw8hPLKOeAzo XJuf3Um4rGodg== Received: by mail-ed1-f72.google.com with SMTP id b7-20020a056402350700b00435bd1c4523so13364512edd.5 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:56:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=I2spB+aaamAHnYVhzW8jM9jqRLtvKJz2cNyXAKu8lvc=; b=XQXXezlnOJBDckPZezn8tZuvZScXtrFumpnKFQwUbXefnNu/GkEeTxgozkLro4xcVP FsMJNnkjw1lPbLH00cuDGVqMRrqDhLxavrVxaRvD2lLi2hVqvrpje7yI5W38IL+ujvwz 4nbKhOn1X7pCMX/8eHB4HvemCo8nBBvnWNsVF5L2t7fedEzXWhd2rVzkco8E+rTDl7Mo rdcz9XwaO/JVhHjDCWWl+g5gdQaQiZfznOQeBXNm20HbiutsD2slKT10IJrahPSTqE88 4AtA/ezwdxzOZ/lv7sKGyjhyaBBD8wS6puRYCoeHx6m+/3GqQGXrC3FAOAgncB5ijHwt ZXnw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/dFJvLUylm9kbo9QEhU6/ylm81FdGyPlEmuHVsWz/o6LjWUSEJ TpFFkYcP2mT1YWRdqe3PrNUXTo3jJ2DJvMOzwEnxa/8iQqV74tyotk7FVJu7I9PK/cW86YMCiY4 F544+HvtMEtc49KP2/mhw+SE+ X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6d20:b0:728:46e4:dac6 with SMTP id sa32-20020a1709076d2000b0072846e4dac6mr43000796ejc.280.1657180611148; Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:56:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vewHOd2OH6T6wVpM7pKvTRtMsAH5SiFILSaMFm+rDuRJ2bWfHgWfd3tPXAvXgVrChQ8Y3Log== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6d20:b0:728:46e4:dac6 with SMTP id sa32-20020a1709076d2000b0072846e4dac6mr43000783ejc.280.1657180610950; Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:56:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Keschdeichel.fritz.box ([2a02:6d40:3a4f:7b00:c19b:938e:7c97:afe2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id eq26-20020a056402299a00b0043a26e3db72sm9957123edb.54.2022.07.07.00.56.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:56:50 -0700 (PDT) From: christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com To: Nithin Dabilpuram Cc: Akhil Goyal , dpdk stable Subject: patch 'examples/ipsec-secgw: fix promiscuous mode option' has been queued to stable release 19.11.13 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:54:25 +0200 Message-Id: <20220707075522.194223-30-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.37.0 In-Reply-To: <20220707075522.194223-1-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> References: <20220707075522.194223-1-christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Hi, FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 19.11.13 Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet. It will be pushed if I get no objections before 07/09/22. So please shout if anyone has objections. Also note that after the patch there's a diff of the upstream commit vs the patch applied to the branch. This will indicate if there was any rebasing needed to apply to the stable branch. If there were code changes for rebasing (ie: not only metadata diffs), please double check that the rebase was correctly done. Queued patches are on a temporary branch at: https://github.com/cpaelzer/dpdk-stable-queue This queued commit can be viewed at: https://github.com/cpaelzer/dpdk-stable-queue/commit/386ada62c2c99588c96b61f4ebe0d49c6970de05 Thanks. Christian Ehrhardt --- >From 386ada62c2c99588c96b61f4ebe0d49c6970de05 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nithin Dabilpuram Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 20:48:30 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-secgw: fix promiscuous mode option [ upstream commit 23d3a468c42ac8b63a36c9c4a6f01e459350f777 ] Currently default value of promiscuous mode flag is true and even there is command line argument to set it to true. So it never is in non-promiscuous mode. Fix it by changing default value to false. Fixes: d299106e8e31 ("examples/ipsec-secgw: add IPsec sample application") Signed-off-by: Nithin Dabilpuram Acked-by: Akhil Goyal --- examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c index 8e9b45493a..ce57787a14 100644 --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec-secgw.c @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static const struct option lgopts[] = { static uint32_t enabled_port_mask; static uint64_t enabled_cryptodev_mask = UINT64_MAX; static uint32_t unprotected_port_mask; -static int32_t promiscuous_on = 1; +static int32_t promiscuous_on; static int32_t numa_on = 1; /**< NUMA is enabled by default. */ static uint32_t nb_lcores; static uint32_t single_sa; -- 2.37.0 --- Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-empty: --- --- - 2022-07-07 09:54:12.481509108 +0200 +++ 0030-examples-ipsec-secgw-fix-promiscuous-mode-option.patch 2022-07-07 09:54:10.845823876 +0200 @@ -1 +1 @@ -From 23d3a468c42ac8b63a36c9c4a6f01e459350f777 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From 386ada62c2c99588c96b61f4ebe0d49c6970de05 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 @@ -5,0 +6,2 @@ +[ upstream commit 23d3a468c42ac8b63a36c9c4a6f01e459350f777 ] + @@ -12 +13,0 @@ -Cc: stable@dpdk.org @@ -21 +22 @@ -index ad1b55f85c..25255e053c 100644 +index 8e9b45493a..ce57787a14 100644 @@ -24,2 +25 @@ -@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ uint32_t single_sa_idx; - /* mask of enabled ports */ +@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static const struct option lgopts[] = { @@ -27,0 +28 @@ + static uint32_t unprotected_port_mask; @@ -32 +33 @@ - uint32_t single_sa; + static uint32_t single_sa;