David Marchand <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 10:20 AM David Marchand
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> +# OVS_DPDK_CHECK_TESTPMD()
>> +#
>> +# Check dpdk-testpmd availability.
>> +#
>> +m4_define([OVS_DPDK_CHECK_TESTPMD],
>> +  [AT_SKIP_IF([! which dpdk-testpmd >/dev/null 2>/dev/null])
>> +])
>> +
>> +
>> +# OVS_DPDK_START_TESTPMD()
>> +#
>> +# Start dpdk-testpmd in background.
>> +#
>> +m4_define([OVS_DPDK_START_TESTPMD],
>> +  [AT_CHECK([lscpu], [], [stdout])
>> + AT_CHECK([cat stdout | grep "NUMA node(s)" | awk '{c=1; while
>> (c++<$(3)) {printf "512,"}; print "512"}' > NUMA_NODE])
>> +   eal_options="--socket-mem="$(cat NUMA_NODE)" --file-prefix page0 
>> --single-file-segments --no-pci"
>> +   options="$1"
>> +   [ "$options" != "${options%% -- *}" ] || options="$options -- "
>
> I realised, looking at a generated dpdk testsuite file (while trying
> to understand a Intel CI failure), that this syntax above is wrong.
>
> It is not a big problem, since testpmd (/getopt) does not complain
> about such a trailing --.
> Yet, better to avoid [] and instead use a "if test ...; then ...; fi" 
> construct.

I think we need to use [[...]] to get the behavior you intend under m4,
but also we can use test (since '[' is usually either an alias or a
reimplementation of 'test').

WDYT?

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to