[ovs-dev] [dpdk-latest PATCH] netdev-dpdk: Prefix network structures with rte_.
Ilya Maximets
i.maximets at samsung.com
Tue Jun 11 16:30:14 UTC 2019
On 11.06.2019 19:10, David Marchand wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 5:36 PM Ilya Maximets <i.maximets at samsung.com <mailto:i.maximets at samsung.com>> wrote:
>
> On 11.06.2019 18:21, Ian Stokes wrote:
> > On 6/11/2019 3:40 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
> >> Ian Stokes <ian.stokes at intel.com <mailto:ian.stokes at intel.com>> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 6/10/2019 3:57 PM, Ian Stokes wrote:
> >>>> On 6/6/2019 12:36 PM, David Marchand wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 1:25 PM Ian Stokes <ian.stokes at intel.com <mailto:ian.stokes at intel.com>
> >>>>> <mailto:ian.stokes at intel.com <mailto:ian.stokes at intel.com>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 6/4/2019 12:14 PM, David Marchand wrote:
> >>>>> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 11:29 AM David Marchand
> >>>>> > <david.marchand at redhat.com <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com> <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com>>
> >>>>> <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com>
> >>>>> <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com <mailto:david.marchand at redhat.com>>>> wrote:
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Following a rework of dpdk network structures names [1],
> >>>>> update the
> >>>>> > concerned parts.
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Ran Olivier script:
> >>>>> > sh prefix-net-rte.sh $(find -name "*dpdk*.c")
> >>>>> > sh prefix-net-rte.sh $(find -name "*dpdk*.h")
> >>>>> > sh prefix-net-rte.sh $(find -name "*rte*.c")
> >>>>> > sh prefix-net-rte.sh $(find -name "*rte*.h")
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Plus an extra pass following further changes [2]:
> >>>>> > old=RTE_IPv4
> >>>>> > new=RTE_IPV4
> >>>>> > git grep -lw $old | xargs sed -i -e "s/\<$old\>/$new/g"
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > old=RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPv4
> >>>>> > new=RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPV4
> >>>>> > git grep -lw $old | xargs sed -i -e "s/\<$old\>/$new/g"
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > old=RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPv6
> >>>>> > new=RTE_ETHER_TYPE_IPV6
> >>>>> > git grep -lw $old | xargs sed -i -e "s/\<$old\>/$new/g"
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > 1: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-May/132612.html
> >>>>> > 2: https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=0c9da7555da8
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > Olivier noticed that I had used an early version of his patch.
> >>>>> > The published one handles the update on RTE_IPv4.
> >>>>> > I tried the last version which gives the same result anyway.
> >>>>> > So the extra pass is unnecessary.
> >>>>> >
> >>>>> > I can send a v2 to update the commitlog accordingly.
> >>>>> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi David,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks for this, upon inspection the patch looks fine and I can
> >>>>> confirm
> >>>>> that dpdk-latest is now building with Master of DPDK again.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm just in the process of running a few smoke tests to make sure
> >>>>> there's no issues functionally (I don't expect to see any as the
> >>>>> changes
> >>>>> seem straight forward).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> WRT the v2, what exactly do you want to change in the commit? If it's
> >>>>> trivial I can amend it before committing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I just stripped the useless part in the commitlog and put a link to
> >>>>> Olivier mail which contained his script.
> >>>>> You can see the commitlog here:
> >>>>> https://github.com/david-marchand/ovs/commit/9d367de7d323c28f7c89d590ff60373c47ffa073
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll be applying this to dpdk-latest and dpdk-hwol branches but
> >>>>> not ovs
> >>>>> master (master is still using DPDK 18.11.1 currently so no need for
> >>>>> these changes until it moves to 19.11).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, makes sense.
> >>>>> Thanks Ian.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks David, validated and pushed to dpdk-latest and dpdk-wol.
> >>>
> >>> Good catch actually. In the past we had previously tracked the latest
> >>> DPDK release to compile against, but now that dpdk-latest is used with
> >>> the UNH DPDK CI it probably makes more sense to track DPDK master at
> >>> that's what dpdk-latest looks to enable compilation of.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not against this, would be interested in what peoples thoughts are
> >>> and if so we can modify travis for the dpdk-latest branch.
> >>
> >> At least for this part (per-branch), the travis yml is read on a
> >> per-branch basis. If it changes on one branch, only that branch will
> >> be affected. Is this what you mean?
> >
> > Yes, travis would be changed to track master just for dpdk-latest is my understanding. OVS master and OVS release branches should still only track the DPDK LTS release they are currently validated against in their travis yml.
>
> Makes sense. Broken travis builds on dpdk-latest branch are annoying.
>
>
> I have changes that apply to both master and dpdk-latest branch, then a change for the switch to dpdk master branch in dpdk-latest.
>
> I can post the changes for master on top of your patch that disables kni/igb_uio.
> We merge yours and mine in master, then pull master into dpdk-latest.
>
> Then I would only send the switch to dpdk master branch for the dpdk-latest ovs branch.
>
> Is this ok this way ?
OK for me in general. However, I think that it's time for 'git pull --rebase'
on dpdk-latest branch since it's already a bit diverged and some patches, including
travis patches, will have conflicts.
So, I agree with your scheme, but with rebase instead of pull.
BTW, I'm leaving the office now and will back only on Monday due to public holidays
and a small PTO.
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
More information about the dev
mailing list