From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF6D7CDB470 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 20:58:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9B2C402A2; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 22:58:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-yx1-f51.google.com (mail-yx1-f51.google.com [74.125.224.51]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1389540293 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 22:58:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-yx1-f51.google.com with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-662dc387b7aso320646d50.3 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:58:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20251104.gappssmtp.com; s=20251104; t=1782248300; x=1782853100; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DtjzWNFJnq740xc+dmvS28PrT6iJAq8dUIxS6pgzpkA=; b=MgxiIDQsd7b2qn2urAYuqknGEM0FA00pGuEjs01wNVVLo/qs/9nWWLVSYfeFKbA/zU b9KxItmw0rzis6sAkbKmexAt2WH3bLeFk7sD5AvbOXSYGfyRQ5aDjBaCicM5Yt6bs3wL 4iV6cHmQDyVZE0YtAbSml3jgClpDI9mPnf3bwfhkfms9sMPb7V0HefcNp0To6HtbyLse HtZ5e2OfJgI9TkDTVrzsyphW7QWj91W+1BHn+vxtT4sfN95ReU6GkYQRvIRZDv5vKr4z SaSH+ytJL1WX4r32iEOKG/MKMtofS5ViTeO/TGkHdTwq1t0m7TLjI+s4TcjDFuO3bgBF kUug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1782248300; x=1782853100; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DtjzWNFJnq740xc+dmvS28PrT6iJAq8dUIxS6pgzpkA=; b=JGYgN56ircr4uYSmwrTAxvVS2Ys0rN3IMN8tHikLmFyGdhHGklDeCQKGuxDsUUmB+q ljLSzNLaBi3VxJsli1hi/lVzi4rX5/fycgGtHgLFGymkFNRP776kE1cjNzxodBFOA4xS pWtnMmiZGB3DK0dYs8ln809zQtqdLIvT1KlhYMDtprizrkkfnKwhjroSviU4oR1Eb/GG KGFSqrx+OhhA8S5mgkcKy4wumpusiOhAt1Z8v9aAnScVG2rd5xBDZ1r5gZ5BbF+4Bbd9 jeDsPDtu+j3OdG1IqYuQ0gKVeVFRc+/Q4qn7j7all5iITkbmvL2eecbKQEsHKJAwUrNU yv0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwkM8Zky4IqPzXzN2waL+QLsf07XzVw3bNCg1ouX9Yf2vPLukK9 CX3Vs9P16P7ShCuUjefkOadJ2jEur+E+qevuJEOyE7GeO0Qoois9fJNBe/zrtp0Cmxg= X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cnk5Vyore1fr07m4bnAod+q7As32PXfJFUVrSPdOWaCR2CLGMuElsNnb/buCej Ogo+e1O1IozwXRh1BY0xoUAfUZiQvG6Vkv6jQihuRtwiuFxzywK5yhuQT/Mm4MnrYoay6ablmym pTr4Kvwb5wc/pjkLXfTOdcQV7N1bO68+LsUziCQ4FE/oZz9u9EV4jFLQrlKt7SLLlnYcRqrQwmg LbIhO6uYv18qfa006lCpsOxUQyTzE0gd3ENcY8ttmN2g005YwNQxfzYxJ4Vd+9QyUgegAQ0K6Ve AfgasbOhI+ANIU+EPLk/v5YD715cYzgo6HbqxB54R9xEWvDat8oKoR1XyXRRml2L2o8JIvKNN4G 6rGQZTViWXCTmIGf3KuRPwea5Lh5KdLp6ydI8MFY37eYXeCKO1zSXbCldpY5qkuhFNdhKFQgCAc YAfcuRKL3N7PdtG3lANzNNMimpOnd/JTL+PqEtv3Xy6iaGnw9VEqMQvA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:690e:169a:b0:662:e0b5:340 with SMTP id 956f58d0204a3-6636e46e619mr527170d50.19.1782248300261; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phoenix.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 956f58d0204a3-66314d444c7sm5731192d50.13.2026.06.23.13.58.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:58:17 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Marat Khalili Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Konstantin Ananyev Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] test/bpf: check that bpf_convert can be JIT'd Message-ID: <20260623135817.2246dfed@phoenix.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20260608203322.1116296-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20260621162524.82690-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20260621162524.82690-7-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 On Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:57:35 +0000 Marat Khalili wrote: > > + { > > + struct rte_bpf_jit jit; > > + > > + rte_bpf_get_jit(bpf, &jit); > > Out of abundance of caution I would also prefill jit with zeroes and check the > return code here. Makes sense, but the test already was just doing same thing elsewhere: static int run_test(const struct bpf_test *tst) { int32_t ret, rv; ... bpf = rte_bpf_load(&tst->prm); ... /* repeat the same test with jit, when possible */ rte_bpf_get_jit(bpf, &jit); if (jit.func != NULL) {