On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 10:20 AM Simon Horman <simon.hor...@corigine.com> 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 <david.march...@redhat.com>
>
> 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? -- David Marchand _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
