Hi Huilong, On 05/07/2015 03:57 AM, Xu, HuilongX wrote: > Hi Olivier, > Today I find a compile error, when I test ip fragment on dpdk.org. would you > check this? thanks a lot. > My dpdk.org commit: a6d71fa7146cc04320c2485d6dde44c1d888d652 > The compile error as below: > CC main.o > /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c: In function 'init_mem': > /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c:748:8: error: 'MBUF_DATA_SIZE' > undeclared (first use in this function) > 0, MBUF_DATA_SIZE, socket); > ^ > /root/dpdk/examples/ip_fragmentation/main.c:748:8: note: each undeclared > identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
Sure, I'll have a look. Thanks for reporting. Regards, Olivier > > > Best regards > > huilong > > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zoltan Kiss > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 6:39 PM > To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Olivier Matz; dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 00/13] mbuf: enhancements of mbuf clones > > Hi, > > On 22/04/15 12:59, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 10:57 AM >>> To: dev at dpdk.org >>> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; zoltan.kiss at linaro.org; Richardson, Bruce; >>> nhorman at tuxdriver.com; olivier.matz at 6wind.com >>> Subject: [PATCH v6 00/13] mbuf: enhancements of mbuf clones >>> >>> The first objective of this series is to fix the support of indirect >>> mbufs when the application reserves a private area in mbufs. It also >>> removes the limitation that rte_pktmbuf_clone() is only allowed on >>> direct (non-cloned) mbufs. The series also contains some enhancements >>> and fixes in the mbuf area that makes the implementation of the >>> last patches easier. >>> >> >> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com> > > When does this series get merged? > > Regards, > > Zoltan >