On 11/20/2018 8:23 AM, Ori Kam wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dekel Peled >> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 6:55 PM >> To: [email protected]; [email protected]; >> [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected]; Ori Kam <[email protected]>; Shahaf Shuler >> <[email protected]>; Dekel Peled <[email protected]> >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix MPLSoUDP encapsulation >> >> Set MPLS label value in appropriate location at mplsoudp_encap_conf, >> so it is correctly copied to rte_flow_item_mpls. >> >> Fixes: a1191d39cb57 ("app/testpmd: add MPLSoUDP encapsulation") >> Cc: [email protected] >> >> Signed-off-by: Dekel Peled <[email protected]> >> --- >> app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 4 ++-- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> index 1275074..40e64cc 100644 >> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c >> @@ -15804,10 +15804,10 @@ static void >> cmd_set_mplsoudp_encap_parsed(void *parsed_result, >> struct cmd_set_mplsoudp_encap_result *res = parsed_result; >> union { >> uint32_t mplsoudp_label; >> - uint8_t label[3]; >> + uint8_t label[4]; >> } id = { >> .mplsoudp_label = >> - rte_cpu_to_be_32(res->label) & RTE_BE32(0x00ffffff), >> + rte_cpu_to_be_32(res->label<<4) & >> RTE_BE32(0x00ffffff), >> }; >> >> if (strcmp(res->mplsoudp, "mplsoudp_encap") == 0) >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 > > Acked-by: Ori Kam <[email protected]>
Hi Ori, Dekel, What is the scope of this patch? Briefly how critical it is and what will be broken and what is exposure of it?
