From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3754A034F; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A354067A; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981FD4013F for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 12:22:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C1C5C0143; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:22:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 08 Jun 2021 06:22:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= L7RYR9Ui3ILtqVoN4LB463HNRygbThqr7UYjgJH0OA0=; b=WfFr9BCmIkcvEYNu m43XYOxFo7lcqDvTvMUVVWz7XUrvCeB64+tyCO43Ug88dj/6TqVboPthAV7cfTCR jQsvPUfvb0OKLIiLaCjYfijlQspPzm+kfeUtovyCq1zFAz2kPpwCAE2E+AGzr+Cy YV2Jj5Cy/Sg2luuVT3knrFLlH6202oqDSFLYf7EzbZTY+40P/HY12SO849QVo59x oOofofKFZyA4GF+Z2BOsnk2iUViTaAaMH4Ka988prB7YSoIk1D7gyOpzyf2Th+dY cmgUfmB0HqnoVyjnLuYRDhg+MB0wXQckufqZM8XSimw87AwSDbeec55sg6vZ/r/O +S1x7w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=L7RYR9Ui3ILtqVoN4LB463HNRygbThqr7UYjgJH0O A0=; b=I40u2r8io0f56VpxzAqBB0F5lpc5DtML5Y9N5ZCBwJZCsXoTw9Tt6ifEo ASkReg5LTqelO1cx0IV5Txk+tla55uMB87MMtvnxuwem/lnmJRbLlNOEXLqc4POy 0knAXWgPNVmN3ZAr8m2CTHDtP6e49tq6uXZ07mq+H7xwtCmJSX2+fX7HfGOzLiDp 2WPMvgHZTGN408vIDz/l/wLsMo9WeSp9RZ9n2JG9WrOiGUShzGmrNMAEWhunxftE 4x84S1RRXzphH2SrZpP6cyGC58F0f/sAySeeFvmjg/gUbex/ndJQt75FFypXKk3V DPS4cbIXBE8RXP1mcrVHdH479hNaw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrfedtledgudduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 06:22:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Min Hu (Connor)" , Andrew Rybchenko Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, aman.deep.singh@intel.com Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 12:22:16 +0200 Message-ID: <2021092.ZKMin5vSrh@thomas> In-Reply-To: <2e30c1c4-4b6b-336f-3a31-a84979b7150f@oktetlabs.ru> References: <1614906276-34293-1-git-send-email-oulijun@huawei.com> <1619054288-17556-1-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com> <2e30c1c4-4b6b-336f-3a31-a84979b7150f@oktetlabs.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v13] app/testpmd: support multi-process X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 08/06/2021 10:42, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 4/22/21 4:18 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote: > > --- a/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/run_app.rst > > +++ b/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/run_app.rst [...] > > +All the dev ops is supported in primary process. While secondary process is not permitted > > +to allocate or release shared memory, so some ops are not supported as follows:: > > +``dev_configure`` > > +``dev_start`` > > +``dev_stop`` > > +``rx_queue_setup`` > > +``tx_queue_setup`` > > +``rx_queue_release`` > > +``tx_queue_release`` > > @Thomas, @Ferrh, shouldn't it be handled on ethdev level as > well if it is really that strict. Yes it should be documented at ethdev level, not testpmd. I think it was kept fuzzy for too long.