From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f172.google.com (mail-wr0-f172.google.com [209.85.128.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 902E2E5D for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:21:12 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr0-f172.google.com with SMTP id z34so16531984wrz.10 for ; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:21:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=h7aKNwcYS2i+ZZzDccLj7t+DhPcAUtfEAuauSWfbV3M=; b=WUz2eVqVq17/4z2wATJ9MQ5viRkGDTS1DGYAFOcSeorf1RvPiiLoZB40iH1EDFYMdi wToYdPKjZGhCP0XZnnhwwC8gaxxe0GGCvUWPSDv54L103nYkZdxHjtQ8WUkmRohCA4Y1 6ZXsGFARyW7d+6VWJbR/b1fNuIvwZhCTHIhmOKq3Af09ZU/icNWPrcP1FC+0SyJYd2BK wJqtFxgrtugds4r7/ZIBTWt9AVtdHVUCxaDDw1DmrEH4o95wu7bNam8rF54iuAKGhBs5 /TOapsTWtJ5xV15Tgi/a6VgmbX1U9IPA2Ls4gh4jRGrKAmDcqFzcgPUEJ0J4CWWRyDYV hy1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=h7aKNwcYS2i+ZZzDccLj7t+DhPcAUtfEAuauSWfbV3M=; b=XQJwl9fMkbbCrmGAxo91rgqyAbyyBPWMDWI20dlK4qQtwmKAjtYl86R46ad4TdKBSy zgTz+nIP88uC8qukEaqfNAVUrr7qmH1RhCNl790q0KvtpvdEyFkVQOOOgc8lExoe1JIb UJPAyff7spGD9jUKReqYyNoq6HTzJqR/HLMqqkL4wTQgCu4d1fm6XbreqQ2QgGh//InH E45v3Sg2ZDdn2v/aYOe2Tg3d2HuXTCbs0G5hcdBMQs3fz8lkqXXqhNOWdaWBWfBmvxm0 qDoXTzLe8p64H92BDdZeS78ONus9zbu+7DXlB2BcZNqOtCZNab/Jv3PsHxV0nJe5x6xW aXdw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7xq+iLiaKCgBOZhAyOnaRS1e6X+s2Q5Kuxh9XJs4DBGYqJUBNS YbY1Sl5+O2PS7Ie/pALN3gv7 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbQYRLTv6KNn+6sb82QIuYlmZ//ASJXqrQxaV5eKgY+ECnPMfKkbgGq2YbsDqnhFxLnAKCV6w== X-Received: by 10.223.147.133 with SMTP id 5mr32899658wrp.230.1512980471932; Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:21:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o22sm18031970wrb.40.2017.12.11.00.21.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:21:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:21:32 +0100 From: Nelio Laranjeiro To: Anoob Joseph Cc: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy , Radu Nicolau , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20171211082132.usggk5hfz3xy5usl@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <6ac80a2be156911ee35c894924a02f04c43f49fc.1511449894.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com> <20171208144000.seega54cbv7prktb@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> <11087367-b892-aae7-07bc-555232a0ce8d@caviumnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <11087367-b892-aae7-07bc-555232a0ce8d@caviumnetworks.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add target queues in flow actions 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: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 08:21:12 -0000 Hi Anoob, On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 10:10:28PM +0530, Anoob Joseph wrote: > HI Nelio, > > > On 08-12-2017 20:10, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 07:30:03PM +0530, Anoob wrote: > > > Hi Nelio, > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > + goto flow_create; > > > > + /* Try Queue. */ > > > > + for (i = 0; > > > > + i < eth_dev->data->nb_rx_queues; ++i) > > > > + if (eth_dev->data->rx_queues[i]) > > > > + break; > > > Is the following check correct? > > [...] > > > > For an application, it seems not necessary. The application knows which > > queues are configured in the drivers has it has made the configuration. > > > > Removing it in the v3. > I think you misunderstood me here. Indeed, I misunderstood, > I was talking about the following line. > > + if (i != eth_dev->data->nb_rx_queues) > + return -1; > > Shouldn't it be? > > + if (i == eth_dev->data->nb_rx_queues) > + return -1; Yes it should. Anyway, I don't thing it is necessary to keep this check, from what I saw in the application source code, it initialise all Rx queues up to nb_rx_queues without leaving any hole. According to this, I'll just remove this verification, is it okay for you? Thanks, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND