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 0A91DA04C0 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 14:36:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7EB1D5F8; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 14:35:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030801D5C9; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 14:35:54 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: /vdQWuefBYeJA5oHZG07N3uockFn5RKr1Jr5Zl69yjyV+PZHEPSjanlfbnlJVkDzAAGt0h/Nnh GxhAYIVm/bRQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9768"; a="152397198" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,355,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="152397198" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Oct 2020 05:35:52 -0700 IronPort-SDR: 8Q9ukEasaJuy8MzDCkPWZdip63FuQEhbQkYCPWR+qUZVam7fos7n2a1ojK2FTEghe01LXfp+JP DMGgsnuRL+9w== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,355,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="528913367" Received: from dhunt5-mobl5.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.249.34.11]) ([10.249.34.11]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Oct 2020 05:35:51 -0700 From: David Hunt To: Lukasz Wojciechowski , Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org References: <20200925224209.12173-1-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> <20201008052323.11547-1-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> <20201008052323.11547-13-l.wojciechow@partner.samsung.com> <3b991d39-1697-5b55-bdb9-83f71d0a8f9d@intel.com> Message-ID: <5dbcfb04-35c5-5d69-7958-47e5a50bc82e@intel.com> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 13:35:50 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3b991d39-1697-5b55-bdb9-83f71d0a8f9d@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v5 12/15] distributor: fix scalar matching X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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 Sender: "stable" Hi Lukasz, On 9/10/2020 1:31 PM, David Hunt wrote: > > On 8/10/2020 6:23 AM, Lukasz Wojciechowski wrote: >> Fix improper indexes while comparing tags. >> In the find_match_scalar() function: >> * j iterates over flow tags of following packets; >> * w iterates over backlog or in flight tags positions. >> >> Fixes: 775003ad2f96 ("distributor: add new burst-capable library") >> Cc: david.hunt@intel.com >> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >> >> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Wojciechowski >> --- >>   lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c | 4 ++-- >>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c >> b/lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c >> index 9fd7dcab7..4bd23a990 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_distributor/rte_distributor.c >> @@ -261,13 +261,13 @@ find_match_scalar(struct rte_distributor *d, >>             for (j = 0; j < RTE_DIST_BURST_SIZE ; j++) >>               for (w = 0; w < RTE_DIST_BURST_SIZE; w++) >> -                if (d->in_flight_tags[i][j] == data_ptr[w]) { >> +                if (d->in_flight_tags[i][w] == data_ptr[j]) { >>                       output_ptr[j] = i+1; >>                       break; >>                   } >>           for (j = 0; j < RTE_DIST_BURST_SIZE; j++) >>               for (w = 0; w < RTE_DIST_BURST_SIZE; w++) >> -                if (bl->tags[j] == data_ptr[w]) { >> +                if (bl->tags[w] == data_ptr[j]) { >>                       output_ptr[j] = i+1; >>                       break; >>                   } > > Hi Lukasz, > > Could you give a bit more information on the problem that this is fixing? > > Were you finding that flows were not being assigned to workers > correctly in the scalar code? > > You answer this question in the next patch in the series, as you are adding a test to check the flows go to the correct workers, etc. You can igonore this question, and: Acked-by: David Hunt