[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: app/testpmd: add device removal command

[Wu, Jingjing]

> >
> > Since dealing with device is kind of new, it can be OK to create new
> > command tree, but there are already hotplug commands per port:
> > "port attach #PCI|#VDEV_NAME"
> > "port detach #P"
> >
> 
> Those two commands deal with the etherdev hotplug API.
> The new command should test the rte_dev one.
> 
I was confused. The forwarding in testpmd setup is based on port id, right?
And all the devices listed in testpmd is etherdev, and all functional testings are all based on port id, right?
Then what is the difference to use port id or device name in testpmd?
And if no difference, what is the difference between detach and remove?

The only difference here I think is
Remove command is using rte_bus hotplug framework.
Attach/detach is using rte_eth_dev_detach API.

I think remove command should be an important command, and should not have ambiguity.
At least we need to doc it clearly.


> As Thomas pointed out, the etherdev one deals only with eth ports, while
> hotplug could be generalized to other devices, such as cryptodev.
> 
> > perhaps it can be good to keep "attach", "detach" keywords for device to
> > be consistent?
> >
> > "device attach #name"
> > "device detach #name"
> >
> 
> I made a point of naming the hotplug operations in rte_bus plug/unplug
> to avoid the confusion with the etherdev API. hotplug_add /
> hotplug_remove also marks the distinction.
> 
> I don't know if it would be helpful for a developer writing a PMD,
> searching for a way to test a functionality to have an API name
> mismatch.
> 
> > Also a show equivalent can be added to work in device level:
> > "show device info"
> >
> 
> I think it would be useful.
> 
> >
> > [1]
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-August/072764.html
> >
> >
> 
> --
> Gaëtan Rivet
> 6WIND