From patchwork Wed Jul 29 16:39:26 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: "Lu, Nannan" X-Patchwork-Id: 74973 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@inbox.dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@inbox.dpdk.org Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D105EA052B; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:47:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BDAD4C93; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:47:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC68D4C93 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:47:35 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-SDR: JKsxBIUAKmTcOTJI3DvsLg0uu1+XEayKP0HNXZ80eZpWUDD52EGmuAcFg5dLoUEk3Q2jv3h6q7 K+vkCXkcC5pw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9696"; a="149217420" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,409,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="149217420" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Jul 2020 00:47:34 -0700 IronPort-SDR: YpJhZxB6VfMZRqPR/2KJSka3ECrJZ04CR14qq53+f5frEGZ/sSPJLCSvStx8Yedp3fZTGaGJB8 9j/+871xVJXA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,409,1589266800"; d="scan'208";a="328585986" Received: from dpdk-lunannan.sh.intel.com ([10.67.111.68]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 29 Jul 2020 00:47:33 -0700 From: Nannan Lu To: dts@dpdk.org Cc: Nannan Lu Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 16:39:26 +0000 Message-Id: <1596040766-1659440-1-git-send-email-nannan.lu@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 Subject: [dts] [PATCH V1] test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst: add description for Max_vfs case X-BeenThere: dts@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: test suite reviews and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dts-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dts" Add description for Max_vfs test case to make this case adapt to different kinds of CVL NICs. Signed-off-by: Nannan Lu --- test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst b/test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst index 72c37d7..ad0befd 100644 --- a/test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst +++ b/test_plans/cvl_dcf_switch_filter_test_plan.rst @@ -2480,11 +2480,10 @@ are dropped. Test case: Max vfs ================== -Description: 256 VFs can be created on a CVL nic, if 2*100G card, each PF -can create 128 VFs, else if 4*25G card, each PF can create 64 VFs. This +Description: 256 VFs can be created on a CVL NIC, if 2*100G NIC, each PF +can create 128 VFs, else if 4*25G NIC, each PF can create 64 VFs. This case is used to test when all VFs on a PF are used, switch filter rules can work. - -design case with 4*25G card. +This case is designed based on 4*25G NIC. 1. generate 64 VFs on PF::