From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22AB3239 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 23:02:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Nov 2017 14:02:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,468,1505804400"; d="scan'208";a="7265791" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.241.225.203]) ([10.241.225.203]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2017 14:02:20 -0800 To: "Wu, Jingjing" , =?UTF-8?Q?Ga=c3=abtan_Rivet?= Cc: Raslan Darawsheh , "thomas@monjalon.net" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "salehals@mellanox.com" References: <1503499024-12480-1-git-send-email-rasland@mellanox.com> <20170828095523.GE8124@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> <2200a72f-92bb-c4e6-db9d-b00961fc328b@intel.com> <20170828111240.GF8124@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810E4255C@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <24d62f28-52c6-6df6-525c-920c97e52112@intel.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 14:02:19 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810E4255C@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: app/testpmd: add device removal command X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 22:02:22 -0000 On 9/7/2017 1:17 AM, Wu, Jingjing wrote: >>> >>> 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. Hi Raslan, With latest code "detach" does rte_bus hotplug remove. So I believe this patch is no more required. Can you please confirm? Thanks, ferruh > > 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 >