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 9EAF1A0561; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:32:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F2CC406B4; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:32:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941E240698 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:32:20 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1616070739; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=y642Ac3H9EkXJeRA6fOOd2tWywbPaoig/Mtq7SZbE+0=; b=RIs7qY99ZaqBGE9pxO2r7/Sr2nADUePEMQ9AkFTkjPD0wEY5Y+yWs0SuktFdSA1h4XYw0N jEpNSXKs6H4QrtkCInoNJY4B9TBRFnxpCLRj67FVHkgWCK3mVGr/Tc3EVs2jww5vSV48An ssQduRZ2QkGXn4+qHZqjH5REZ1D93y8= Received: from mail-vk1-f198.google.com (mail-vk1-f198.google.com [209.85.221.198]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-271-zpOTzM-sN-utP-X0S2XAxw-1; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 08:32:17 -0400 X-MC-Unique: zpOTzM-sN-utP-X0S2XAxw-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f198.google.com with SMTP id o206so12149562vka.0 for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:32:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=y642Ac3H9EkXJeRA6fOOd2tWywbPaoig/Mtq7SZbE+0=; b=WP6ktFPj1L5T7wqLZyEfynhPzAwF4GMumRCInmYzShI4/mLku+1iOunZiqsHua7UX1 WBHBjNDvZNPzYO72DabT4HGaufoP6Aqj+MxLSMjM9qKhhI6dilYJyyb0VYP8zIvpcMPQ cJIGOtw4wtFZlofPhtE8fGe/qTEyp+UCQAjYwMfXUTsEp6YnfhcY0UtEZYRQaVSfz9pS PlnLC6l4VhXsCd1MhXZn7j6pvBUq9zs3yCpaC0HJSiy8sdJoHUeNpHwphqKzhW2MuBxZ oWmIGNxhxgkQHUYl5s9FOV156CoEnM0bbfwXvD2t+9FyCq6RBkqJTkRKqhIXCz43zUGA 4yJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530i4M9McMPC/EJMvtk22cAb52jFhlq8jiHg6nr6Kts00tyAVYNu KIq4Pf9yDn82KXzFINtHv9hIj4GWzwRo6pkGEdx/hm2duYxis8gGP+txBoqQXnAeajTQpZ7+DDP QaeYu1tLdAApAaWKo1YA= X-Received: by 2002:a67:d210:: with SMTP id y16mr6268029vsi.17.1616070737012; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:32:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxy17FJRKeWMDrGuGIvzven5JpaCnpRWhLLwvTMW6ZZ2oDwZ0O4fuJcUQQfXHH4vjnm3IH4WmntoNkiNZKOFP4= X-Received: by 2002:a67:d210:: with SMTP id y16mr6268003vsi.17.1616070736764; Thu, 18 Mar 2021 05:32:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210201174602.30923-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <76079e53-2638-8cc2-aaaf-6c2c10f9592e@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <76079e53-2638-8cc2-aaaf-6c2c10f9592e@redhat.com> From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 13:32:05 +0100 Message-ID: To: Maxime Coquelin Cc: dev , Chenbo Xia Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 21.05] net/virtio: remove duplicate port id from virtio_user X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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" On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:04 PM Maxime Coquelin wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_user/vhost_user.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_user/vhost_user.c > > index ec2c53c8fb..18ae29eed2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_user/vhost_user.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_user/vhost_user.c > > @@ -950,7 +950,8 @@ vhost_user_update_link_state(struct virtio_user_dev *dev) > > r = recv(data->vhostfd, buf, 128, MSG_PEEK); > > if (r == 0 || (r < 0 && errno != EAGAIN)) { > > dev->net_status &= (~VIRTIO_NET_S_LINK_UP); > > - PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "virtio-user port %u is down", dev->port_id); > > + PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "virtio-user port %u is down", > > + dev->hw.port_id); > > Trivial, but it can fit in a single line, as IIRC, we can go up to 100 > chars now. If you agree, we can fix it while applying, no need to > resubmit. Yep, ok for me, thanks. -- David Marchand