On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 10:34:22AM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 10:20 AM Simon Horman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 06:28:13PM +0200, David Marchand wrote: > > > Caught during some code review. > > > The incriminated commit had put an unneeded check on tc ingress support > > > for the meter offloading test. > > > > > > Note: SUPPORT_TC_INGRESS_PPS had been reworked in the commit 5f0fdf5e2c2e > > > ("test: Move check for tc ingress pps support to test script."). > > > > > > Fixes: 5660b89a309d ("dpif-netlink: Offloading meter to tc police action") > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <[email protected]> > > > > Hi David, > > > > I am slightly confused by this. > > Well, I am a bit lost in those tests :-). > > > > > 1. The test in question is for hardware offload of metering, > > which will use the TC datapath. > > 2. The test creates a meter with pktps (PPS) rate limiting, > > which will lead to the creation of a TC police action with a PPS rate. > > I had not made a link with tc.. thanks for forcing me to look better. > > > > 3. SUPPORT_TC_INGRESS_PPS is intended to check if > > TC police action with PPS rate is supported by the kernel. > > Well, back to this topic then. > SUPPORT_TC_INGRESS_PPS does not exist anymore. > So I guess we should at least fix it as CHECK_TC_INGRESS_PPS?
See, I knew I was missing something obvious. Yes, I think that update is needed. It looks like I missed it when writing 5f0fdf5e2c2e. And I think it should be that commit in the Fixes tag for your patch. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
