[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 7/7] app/testpmd: check not detaching device twice
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Tue Oct 23 16:06:12 CEST 2018
On 10/23/2018 1:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> I want to submit two more patches to clean testpmd for attach/detach.
>
> I propose to drop this patch from this series,
> and I will submit a new series dedicated to testpmd cleanup,
> including this patch.
Got the set without this patch, please sent it separately.
>
>
> 23/10/2018 14:13, Thomas Monjalon:
>> 23/10/2018 14:03, Thomas Monjalon:
>>> 23/10/2018 12:01, Iremonger, Bernard:
>>>> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas at monjalon.net]
>>>>> The command "port detach" is removing the EAL rte_device of the ethdev
>>>>> port specified as parameter.
>>>>>
>>>>> After detaching, the pointer, which maps a port to its device, is resetted. This
>>>>
>>>> Typo: "resetted" should be "reset"
>>>>
>>>>> way, it is possible to check whether a port is still associated to a (not
>>>>> removed) device.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
>>>>> 14647fa19..d5998fddc 100644
>>>>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>>>>> @@ -2353,8 +2353,17 @@ setup_attached_port(portid_t pi) void
>>>>> detach_port(portid_t port_id) {
>>>>> + struct rte_device *dev;
>>>>> + portid_t sibling;
>>>>> +
>>>>> printf("Removing a device...\n");
>>>>
>>>> The functionality of the detach_port() function has changed now to
>>>> removing a device, should the function name be changed to reflect
>>>> the new functionality.
>>>
>>> No it doesn't change, it has always removed the rte_device of the port.
>>> But the naming is a bit strange, I agree.
>>> I just changed the log to make it a bit clearer.
>>>
>>>> How about detach_device() instead of detach detach_port().
>>>
>>> The strange thing with testpmd is that every commands take a port id.
>>> The rte_device is hidden in testpmd.
>>> So the detach command is detaching the underlying device of the port,
>>> and all its sibling ports of course.
>>>
>>> What about detach_device_of_port() ?
>>
>> Or detach_port_device()?
>>
>>> [...]
>>>>> - if (rte_dev_remove(rte_eth_devices[port_id].device) != 0) {
>>>>> + if (rte_dev_remove(dev) != 0) {
>>>>> TESTPMD_LOG(ERR, "Failed to detach port %u\n", port_id);
>>>>
>>>> Should the log message be ( ERR "Failed to detach device %s\n", dev->name) ?
>>>
>>> Yes!
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>>> - printf("Port %u is detached. Now total ports is %d\n",
>>>>> - port_id, nb_ports);
>>>>
>>>> How about printf("Device %s is detached, Now total ports is %d\n"
>>>> dev->name, nb_ports);
>>>
>>> The issue is that we cannot get the device name after detach.
>>> I can reword it differently:
>>> Device of port %u is detached, Now total ports is %d
>
>
>
>
More information about the dev
mailing list