21/11/2019 17:23, David Marchand:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:17 PM David Marchand
> <david.march...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:36 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> > > > index 90694a3309..217d577018 100644
> > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> > > > @@ -58,8 +58,6 @@ typedef uint16_t portid_t;
> > > > typedef uint16_t queueid_t;
> > > > typedef uint16_t streamid_t;
> > > >
> > > > -#define MAX_QUEUE_ID ((1 << (sizeof(queueid_t) * 8)) - 1)
> > >
> > > No strong opinion, but would it be simpler if assign 'MAX_QUEUE_ID' to
> > > 'RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT' instead?
> > > #define MAX_QUEUE_ID RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT
> >
> > This was my first solution once I spotted this.
> > But I prefer to globally replace: when reading this code, using
> > MAX_QUEUE_ID leaves the impression that testpmd has its own
> > restriction on max queue count.
>
> Btw, not sure we want to backport this, or maybe up to branches
> containing d44f8a485f5d ("app/testpmd: enable per queue configure")
> Opinions?
I am for not backporting.
It is an optimization (stop wasting some memory).
