From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com (mail-wm1-f68.google.com [209.85.128.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F0CC1B296 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 11:14:42 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id u13-v6so8541178wmc.4 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 02:14:42 -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:in-reply-to; bh=bONFNBlecOxe7WfrEGHviu/vUAmdfSIH/HZjCzpHP9Q=; b=cN8Jh2akgP6n0D42ptAM1VHrKtOoIQcLCR5APg0S7ST+OOv5bpgQFxf1+PtwcN8kqt y4Szo0uhzXzJf55u49JzdwDpWWnePAjAd3XPf42pRSN0m6fW0SUUpd51GQUMTsrFEGt5 hm7VxobTbgMQ2SCmHcDH237jaU5onzWrNwwWPfJcwp1UtkfwMpTsUhXHRP0Q1iWECWSk WJaupWyV5zsldYF1fyfL1TgQWtOu2AJrONvsHSSAa2cseQyMO+OoCi7I4gpEhhOkK6MU LA3PB/L6/IKrOcVfrNELe79Os95ma09dwrwlM1bMvvOsuSRBQTzK8cAWbCAr9J/9nE6R g7og== 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:in-reply-to; bh=bONFNBlecOxe7WfrEGHviu/vUAmdfSIH/HZjCzpHP9Q=; b=dD4CByQ2yhO4syhAsTeU2ur+Ugn2kUWP3PSlsiCAqT/q7Z677gEjSRzgxbiQoLxPLy qiGbCAtiySnaT4NmJwzE0Kr0g8GTl0MuZbkF9vRXo+y0GHnXmTLXujTdXg2IstjKYXJe DHsSRq2V8s0lE0Gnt6m7Ns0R+I/SkEwCuScjMXYEv23g5Rt1TaYaxvq42a5aJZbgjICG 7A9TOu/538hmqh6D+izFySpddnMIQsNfA8cnxNqoginRv9sYsPaMvaySqbJ8z4nmQUl/ 2r85ICLC5EUNis4ltHlE82zTdWtUwe7l8FU7w69AvC1mZEm5mKOG+I1JengfcPzuhroE cjSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gIj+XBppq6GTVdNgfyKkECG7heoaJ7zDf3EWP54ngazluxwpv3S BnQUdfBEJRRZF56d9477nGzTDw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WZdpcEwqipDnr9iEOUSQiVQXs1olhi4Fmr6NZDG5PAl9TXSkPloPRWU4r3tvdLYlQrjyUA8g== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:5448:: with SMTP id p8mr9168121wmi.124.1542881681868; Thu, 22 Nov 2018 02:14:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from 6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u10sm5684107wrr.33.2018.11.22.02.14.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Nov 2018 02:14:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2018 11:14:21 +0100 From: Adrien Mazarguil To: Dekel Peled Cc: "wenzhuo.lu@intel.com" , "jingjing.wu@intel.com" , "bernard.iremonger@intel.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Ori Kam , Shahaf Shuler Message-ID: <20181122101421.GK17131@6wind.com> References: <1542646490-37406-1-git-send-email-dekelp@mellanox.com> <20181122090433.GJ17131@6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix MPLSoUDP encapsulation 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, 22 Nov 2018 10:14:42 -0000 On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 09:56:09AM +0000, Dekel Peled wrote: > Thanks, PSB. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Adrien Mazarguil > > Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2018 11:05 AM > > To: Dekel Peled > > Cc: wenzhuo.lu@intel.com; jingjing.wu@intel.com; > > bernard.iremonger@intel.com; dev@dpdk.org; Ori Kam > > ; Shahaf Shuler > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix MPLSoUDP encapsulation > > > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 06:54:50PM +0200, Dekel Peled wrote: > > > Set MPLS label value in appropriate location at mplsoudp_encap_conf, > > > so it is correctly copied to rte_flow_item_mpls. > > > > > > Fixes: a1191d39cb57 ("app/testpmd: add MPLSoUDP encapsulation") > > > Cc: orika@mellanox.com > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dekel Peled > > > --- > > > app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c index > > > 1275074..40e64cc 100644 > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > @@ -15804,10 +15804,10 @@ static void > > cmd_set_mplsoudp_encap_parsed(void *parsed_result, > > > struct cmd_set_mplsoudp_encap_result *res = parsed_result; > > > union { > > > uint32_t mplsoudp_label; > > > - uint8_t label[3]; > > > + uint8_t label[4]; > > > } id = { > > > .mplsoudp_label = > > > - rte_cpu_to_be_32(res->label) & > > RTE_BE32(0x00ffffff), > > > + rte_cpu_to_be_32(res->label<<4) & > > RTE_BE32(0x00ffffff), > > > > Just to be sure, since label is a 20-bit value, isn't the shift supposed to be 12 > > bits? In which case that mask is harmless but misleading. How about: > > > > .mplsoudp_label = rte_cpu_to_be32((res->label & 0xfffff) << 12); > > > > Label is 20-bits value in a 24-bits field, see struct rte_flow_item_mpls. OK, I know, what I missed was the following line: rte_memcpy(mplsoudp_encap_conf.label, &id.label[1], 3); Just a suggestion then: using the same memcpy() offsets in both places for clarity: rte_be32_t label = rte_cpu_to_be32(res->label << 12); memcpy(mplsodudp_encap_conf.label, &label, 3); -- Adrien Mazarguil 6WIND