[dpdk-dev] app/testpmd: fix missing count action fields
Checks
Commit Message
COUNT action has been modified and has several fields not addressable
though testpmd. In addition, as those fields are not definable testpmd
is providing an empty configuration which is undefined.
Fixes: fb8fd96d4251 ("ethdev: add shared counter to flow API")
Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com
Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
---
app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
lib/librte_ethdev/rte_flow.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Comments
On 5/31/2018 3:33 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> COUNT action has been modified and has several fields not addressable
> though testpmd. In addition, as those fields are not definable testpmd
> is providing an empty configuration which is undefined.
>
> Fixes: fb8fd96d4251 ("ethdev: add shared counter to flow API")
> Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.
(Timeout review time frame!)
Hi Ferruh,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 3:19 PM
> To: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Adrien
> Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>
> Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix missing count
> action fields
>
> On 5/31/2018 3:33 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote:
> > COUNT action has been modified and has several fields not addressable
> > though testpmd. In addition, as those fields are not definable
> > testpmd is providing an empty configuration which is undefined.
> >
> > Fixes: fb8fd96d4251 ("ethdev: add shared counter to flow API")
> > Cc: declan.doherty@intel.com
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>
>
> Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.
>
> (Timeout review time frame!)
It might be safer to ping the maintainer before exercising the timeout.
Regards,
Bernard.
@@ -194,6 +194,8 @@ enum index {
ACTION_QUEUE_INDEX,
ACTION_DROP,
ACTION_COUNT,
+ ACTION_COUNT_SHARED,
+ ACTION_COUNT_ID,
ACTION_RSS,
ACTION_RSS_FUNC,
ACTION_RSS_LEVEL,
@@ -788,6 +790,13 @@ static const enum index action_queue[] = {
ZERO,
};
+static const enum index action_count[] = {
+ ACTION_COUNT_ID,
+ ACTION_COUNT_SHARED,
+ ACTION_NEXT,
+ ZERO,
+};
+
static const enum index action_rss[] = {
ACTION_RSS_FUNC,
ACTION_RSS_LEVEL,
@@ -2022,10 +2031,26 @@ static const struct token token_list[] = {
[ACTION_COUNT] = {
.name = "count",
.help = "enable counters for this rule",
- .priv = PRIV_ACTION(COUNT, 0),
- .next = NEXT(NEXT_ENTRY(ACTION_NEXT)),
+ .priv = PRIV_ACTION(COUNT,
+ sizeof(struct rte_flow_action_count)),
+ .next = NEXT(action_count),
.call = parse_vc,
},
+ [ACTION_COUNT_ID] = {
+ .name = "identifier",
+ .help = "counter identifier to use",
+ .next = NEXT(action_count, NEXT_ENTRY(UNSIGNED)),
+ .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY(struct rte_flow_action_count, id)),
+ .call = parse_vc_conf,
+ },
+ [ACTION_COUNT_SHARED] = {
+ .name = "shared",
+ .help = "shared counter",
+ .next = NEXT(action_count, NEXT_ENTRY(BOOLEAN)),
+ .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY_BF(struct rte_flow_action_count,
+ shared, 1)),
+ .call = parse_vc_conf,
+ },
[ACTION_RSS] = {
.name = "rss",
.help = "spread packets among several queues",
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static const struct rte_flow_desc_data rte_flow_desc_action[] = {
MK_FLOW_ACTION(FLAG, 0),
MK_FLOW_ACTION(QUEUE, sizeof(struct rte_flow_action_queue)),
MK_FLOW_ACTION(DROP, 0),
- MK_FLOW_ACTION(COUNT, 0),
+ MK_FLOW_ACTION(COUNT, sizeof(struct rte_flow_action_count)),
MK_FLOW_ACTION(RSS, sizeof(struct rte_flow_action_rss)),
MK_FLOW_ACTION(PF, 0),
MK_FLOW_ACTION(VF, sizeof(struct rte_flow_action_vf)),