From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Subendu Santra <subendu@arista.com>
Cc: stephen@networkplumber.org, dev@dpdk.org, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com,
maryam.tahhan@intel.com, reshma.pattan@intel.com,
Sriram Rajagopalan <sriramr@arista.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/7] app/proc-info: provide way to request info on owned ports
Date: Tue, 03 May 2022 10:47:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5574950.QJadu78ljV@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3710E2E2-5CCC-41F3-A12A-E8B6A884CC40@arista.com>
24/04/2022 07:34, Subendu Santra:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> We were going through the patch set: https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200715212228.28010-7-stephen@networkplumber.org/ and hoping to get clarification on the behaviour if post mask is not specified in the input to `dpdk-proc-info` tool.
>
> Specifically, In PATCH v3 6/7, we see this:
> + /* If no port mask was specified, one will be provided */
> + if (enabled_port_mask == 0) {
> + RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i) {
> + enabled_port_mask |= 1u << i;
>
> However, in PATCH v4 8/8, we see this:
> + /* If no port mask was specified, then show non-owned ports */
> + if (enabled_port_mask == 0) {
> + RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i)
> + enabled_port_mask = 1ul << i;
> + }
>
> Was there any specific reason to show just the last non-owned port in case the port mask was not specified?
> Should we show all non-owned ports in case the user doesn’t specify any port mask?
It looks like a bug. It should be |=
Feel free to send a fix.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-03 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-24 5:34 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/7] app/proc-info: provide way to request info on owned ports Subendu Santra
2022-05-03 5:29 ` Subendu Santra
2022-05-03 8:47 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2022-05-04 17:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-05-10 9:09 ` Subendu Santra
2022-05-10 20:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2022-05-11 7:36 ` Subendu Santra
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-05-06 19:37 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] proc-info enhancements Stephen Hemminger
2020-07-15 21:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/7] app/proc-info enhancments Stephen Hemminger
2020-07-15 21:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/7] app/proc-info: provide way to request info on owned ports Stephen Hemminger
2020-07-17 15:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-21 17:05 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-07-21 17:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-21 17:37 ` Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5574950.QJadu78ljV@thomas \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=maryam.tahhan@intel.com \
--cc=reshma.pattan@intel.com \
--cc=sriramr@arista.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=subendu@arista.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.