23/05/2022 12:53, Subendu Santra:
> Hi Reshma, Thomas,
>
> What do you think about this patch?
It looks to be a fix, right?
Please add a sentence about the previous behaviour,
explaining what is fixed.
Ideally you should show the commit doing the mistake
with the syntax "Fixes:" as in other commits of this tree.
Thanks
> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 6:52 PM Subendu Santra <sube...@arista.com> wrote:
> >
> > Show all non-owned ports when no port mask is specified
> >
> > Fixes: 1dd6cffb6571 ("app/procinfo: provide way to request info on owned
> > ports")
> > Cc: step...@networkplumber.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Subendu Santra <sube...@arista.com>
> > ---
> > app/proc-info/main.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/proc-info/main.c b/app/proc-info/main.c
> > index 56070a3317..2be24b584e 100644
> > --- a/app/proc-info/main.c
> > +++ b/app/proc-info/main.c
> > @@ -1504,10 +1504,10 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> > if (nb_ports == 0)
> > rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "No Ethernet ports - bye\n");
> >
> > - /* If no port mask was specified, then show non-owned ports */
> > + /* If no port mask was specified, then show all non-owned ports */
> > if (enabled_port_mask == 0) {
> > RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV(i)
> > - enabled_port_mask = 1ul << i;
> > + enabled_port_mask |= (1ul << i);
> > }
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS; i++) {
> > --
> > 2.28.0
> >
>
