On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 17:21:42 +
Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 11/16/2022 12:11 PM, madhuker.myt...@oracle.com wrote:
> > From: Madhuker Mythri
> >
> > Crash occurring while the DPDK secondary processes trying to probe the
> > tap-device, where tap-device is a sub-device of Fail-safe device.
> > So
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 17:21:42 +
Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> This is in the 'FOREACH_SUBDEV()' block, why an invalid subdevice
> provided by the macro?
>
> Instead of invalid port check, should we fix the macro?
>
> Overall I am not clear why this defect occurs, bugzilla report also
> don't have muc
On 11/16/2022 12:11 PM, madhuker.myt...@oracle.com wrote:
> From: Madhuker Mythri
>
> Crash occurring while the DPDK secondary processes trying to probe the
> tap-device, where tap-device is a sub-device of Fail-safe device.
> Some-times we get in-valid sub-devices(with the in-valid port-id's),
>
On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:22:24 +0530
madhuker.myt...@oracle.com wrote:
>
> + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(PORT_ID(sdev))) {
> + continue;
> + }
> +
Looks ok but DPDK follows kernel style {} is unnecessary on single statement.
C
From: Madhuker Mythri
Crash occurring while the DPDK secondary processes trying to probe the
tap-device, where tap-device is a sub-device of Fail-safe device.
Some-times we get in-valid sub-devices(with the in-valid port-id's),
due to which the IPC communication does not get response and causes t
From: Madhuker Mythri
Crash occuring while the DPDK secondary processes trying to probe the
tap-device, where tap-device is a sub-device of Fail-safe device.
Some-times we get in-valid sub-devices(with the in-valid port-id’s and
device-names), due to which the IPC communication does not get res
6 matches
Mail list logo
