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 A1B50A0524 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:25:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91EE940689; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:25:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from youngberry.canonical.com (youngberry.canonical.com [91.189.89.112]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E437F40689 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:25:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-qt1-f199.google.com ([209.85.160.199]) by youngberry.canonical.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1loQsd-0006Y3-Kj for stable@dpdk.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 13:25:55 +0000 Received: by mail-qt1-f199.google.com with SMTP id a12-20020ac8108c0000b029023c90fba3dcso1320486qtj.7 for ; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 06:25:55 -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:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GaWppDfOGK9G8fiDOpQfQ1yGWpKfMrI6ydUO7ixEvWY=; b=pVYcmUrr9lHz7bkkmGbKvRjqaGW0T6b4jiAn40habVaUQlAX2qTGtarqjntDPqyvVI rqDwa8o2idpTyIou+5clenQyD02li+mzPP5dvTZH2w57y5dOjHdAxyv+anMlT6ee9O8Y WK8Rq+kc1+wkz5vPbsaq26Dd5cr1boXDtS5pW5PIM1INqtCipiPdZ26AG5ileInJIyAb H7K0dDV5HDcQ68wnoqLKZQCZfvm5fJjayIxOWPztE4/4UOJFh8OfFlrPkilJz5KIiPNr /AJzYv5XHZ8ofUPM6JBNu5gYhdwxvJOvZZoUMuJOGVAvTdIbYN6ZtpdPbDAlizbUs5pZ /Sjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533PMqD9wlMfbIGdNDRMkp3fAhUzK9jNUYY9mcmi6UJJACxXRQL9 RcNFMFhjTu+E4tfr/aDC5S8eKFDKop0kAGaJ+Zug3gQtW44d3vTyidV0y4H7ZwdVfV/grK68f7G w8T0scErGI4S3CeSVXf5ZWnfg9AnyUejwC8ti7lTl X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4698:: with SMTP id g24mr24537160qto.112.1622640354750; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 06:25:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwetg/O7Umyg/oLY2HYqRw7JJivhJMnL9dJLhXnHusk6k8jWMk8YvR84+hJMebPn7lCne04OG7YMlpGY82RB10= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4698:: with SMTP id g24mr24537153qto.112.1622640354531; Wed, 02 Jun 2021 06:25:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Christian Ehrhardt Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:25:28 +0200 Message-ID: To: Jiawei Wang Cc: dpdk stable , Ori Kam Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: [dpdk-stable] " app/testpmd: fix NVGRE encap configuration" incompatible with 19.11.x X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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, this change was targeted for the stable releases commit 9b0da816bdec98c0d6c5d17ccdd337bdbafc3f75 Author: Jiawei Wang Date: Tue Mar 16 06:18:27 2021 +0200 app/testpmd: fix NVGRE encap configuration But when applied it causes: [ 263s] /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c: In function 'parse_vc_action_nvgre_encap': [ 263s] /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c:4254:3: error: missing initializer for field 'protocol' of 'struct rte_flow_item_nvgre' [-Werror=missing-field-initializers] [ 263s] .item_nvgre.protocol = RTE_BE16(RTE_ETHER_TYPE_TEB), [ 263s] ^ [ 263s] In file included from /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/x86_64-default-linux-gcc/include/rte_eth_ctrl.h:11:0, [ 263s] from /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/x86_64-default-linux-gcc/include/rte_ethdev.h:978, [ 263s] from /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c:18: [ 263s] /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD/dpdk-1622611368.078834f40/x86_64-default-linux-gcc/include/rte_flow.h:917:13: note: 'protocol' declared here [ 263s] rte_be16_t protocol; /**< Protocol type (0x6558). */ [ 263s] ^ This is failing not everywhere but in: - SLE_12_SP4/x86_64 - RHEL_7/x86_64 - openSUSE_Leap_42.3/x86_64 The type and the init code looks the same here and in the recent main branch. Neither do I see recent changes that would cause this. And the init just looks right to me, so I'm sure I'm overlooking something. So I wondered (if you consider this patch important for 19.11.x) if you could have a look and consider backporting it so that it works well (or as an alternative let me know that it won't be needed for 19.11.x) References/Logs: 19.11.8 working: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/vvm4qCcmJT/ 19.11.9 fail RH7: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/2wph5nfbCg/ 19.11.9 fail SLE12SP4: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/nGHhkPJbR3/ 19.11.9 fail openSuse42.3: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/43mMx3sY2n/ 19.11.9 witzh the patch dropped works: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/JGZ44BhkC6/ -- Christian Ehrhardt Staff Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd