From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF449A00E6 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:26:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3101B955; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:26:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0C85680; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 15:26:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5BF0441; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:26:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 06 Aug 2019 09:26:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=qYCwsdlk61M1wJOetPWajYOP/X+qXyhwqDKbPBWQh3E=; b=b7Mxtw4G9MrA ybXFh1e4KPExMc1P/dZtKvtgRti6pw77q5YpT+zR40azqKQZiyMWFxy7/ZBbiWVx eXQDNXJOsjEcFM1RNphIPBm14QsOwQ8Fa+5O4Vrc9meAIe1a38zRivjCtFW7lbda lbQPtmKO4JLYn/W83Cm5f/wBSW+RbqE= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=qYCwsdlk61M1wJOetPWajYOP/X+qXyhwqDKbPBWQh 3E=; b=GrnWXw+/8nriw3ApDlyWncDoF3E+xZsgPbC+hWW0wYFhj+WobFOoJZPOi 3D2Yr8v9DNyatV5U47JYfJcyIt+GyPBzzYbP62965ztVU2RTclZK62Q9sZfF86Bb JnR0WXPRUHEg07JpC1aWeOHk3pagJZ1boOximTYiYRYlYsO1/dXVF3v0jEHZOLOH qcHkmxfydPY2umKQmVLppnmjHX5l4a2J4IsULJIuF5DLn3HwCfFv2fd+7l1pOIko Ik82mQZMTYzt6TD4K6Ut18g35SA7EWi+/V37epfjQ7TZeWxUJK10NLAui3cpO8dY gbgsfdH8o+CLHOKuTTmOfsfmf13Lg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduvddruddutddgieegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukf hppeelfedriedrudegledruddugeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhm rghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (114.149.6.93.rev.sfr.net [93.6.149.114]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CD3EB8005B; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:26:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jasvinder Singh Cc: dev@dpdk.org, cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com, stable@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2019 15:26:28 +0200 Message-ID: <3667816.tTLe76bmax@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190806114951.62131-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> References: <20190731113322.135053-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> <20190806114951.62131-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] examples/ip_pipeline: fix wrong value of tc ov weight 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 06/08/2019 13:49, Jasvinder Singh: > The sched library checks the subport tc ov weight value regardless > of whether RTE_SCHED_SUBPORT_TC_OV flag is enabled or not. > > This fix allows application to always set valid tc ov weight value. > > Fixes: 25961ff3bcb9 ("examples/ip_pipeline: add traffic manager object") > > error log > SCHED: pipe_profile_check: Incorrect value for tc ov weight > SCHED: rte_sched_port_check_params: Pipe profile check failed(-22) > Command "tmgr" failed. > > Signed-off-by: Jasvinder Singh > Acked-by: Cristian Dumitrescu > --- > v2: > - add fix line > - change title "tc ov" is not that obvious. I changed the title to "examples/ip_pipeline: fix TC oversubscription weight" +Add Cc stable Applied, thanks