diff mbox

[dpdk-dev] examples/dpdk_qat: Fix RX queue start number to the one just received the packets

Message ID 1443524879-24865-1-git-send-email-zhe.tao@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable, archived
Headers

Commit Message

Zhe Tao Sept. 29, 2015, 11:07 a.m. UTC 
  Every time we started to receive the packets, the start queue number
should be the one that just received the packets, should not start from zero!

Signed-off-by: Zhe Tao <zhe.tao@intel.com>
---
 examples/dpdk_qat/main.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon Dec. 7, 2015, 1:32 a.m. UTC | #1 
2015-09-29 19:07, Zhe Tao:
> Every time we started to receive the packets, the start queue number
> should be the one that just received the packets, should not start from zero!
> 
[...]
> -		for (i = 0; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
> +		for (i = qconf->rx_curr_queue; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {

Anyone to confirm?
Doherty, Declan Dec. 7, 2015, 8:47 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 07/12/15 01:32, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-09-29 19:07, Zhe Tao:
>> Every time we started to receive the packets, the start queue number
>> should be the one that just received the packets, should not start from zero!
>>
> [...]
>> -		for (i = 0; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
>> +		for (i = qconf->rx_curr_queue; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
>
> Anyone to confirm?
>

I'll have a look at this this morning Thomas.
Jingjing Wu March 4, 2016, 8:19 a.m. UTC | #3 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zhe Tao
> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:08 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples/dpdk_qat: Fix RX queue start
> number to the one just received the packets
> 
> Every time we started to receive the packets, the start queue number should
> be the one that just received the packets, should not start from zero!
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhe Tao <zhe.tao@intel.com>
> ---
>  examples/dpdk_qat/main.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c b/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c index
> dc68989..b818e4e 100644
> --- a/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c
> +++ b/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c
> @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ nic_rx_get_packet(struct lcore_conf *qconf)
>  		uint32_t i;
> 
>  		qconf->rx_mbuf_pos = 0;
> -		for (i = 0; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
> +		for (i = qconf->rx_curr_queue; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
>  			qconf->rx_mbuf.len = rte_eth_rx_burst(
>  				qconf->rx_queue_list[qconf-
> >rx_curr_queue].port_id,
>  				qconf->rx_queue_list[qconf-
> >rx_curr_queue].queue_id,

I don't think we need to change the start queue number from 0 to rx_curr_queue.
If changes to start from rx_curr_queue, the queue whose id is less than rx_curr_queue
won't be scanned until this function is called next time.
> --
> 1.9.3
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c b/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c
index dc68989..b818e4e 100644
--- a/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c
+++ b/examples/dpdk_qat/main.c
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@  nic_rx_get_packet(struct lcore_conf *qconf)
 		uint32_t i;
 
 		qconf->rx_mbuf_pos = 0;
-		for (i = 0; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
+		for (i = qconf->rx_curr_queue; i < qconf->n_rx_queue; i++) {
 			qconf->rx_mbuf.len = rte_eth_rx_burst(
 				qconf->rx_queue_list[qconf->rx_curr_queue].port_id,
 				qconf->rx_queue_list[qconf->rx_curr_queue].queue_id,