From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
 [209.85.212.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC19CC546
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:56:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so104576147wib.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 02:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization
 :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding:content-type;
 bh=eMjL9fOrmsVv+tV988Sxx+dGivmdBVgcmGwuN4N8yOE=;
 b=df2yqsIbkPFHBzlNuHaDewbhr46cF8+23UWDu8YuFFuj/hUjs/Ia0wKLeECdvE360O
 gK7GAmRKl1vIX0P6YdjUGStS/WybNProjUyVq4oVIm0vjEJxtiNeTd+5alL2p16IxE0I
 eWFdrs8d2Qf25lAIjlpy2FvtQHv4Pgl56Hy2Cg2zJT/vULUpZy7uT1gCGqXlrhsdg49O
 6dO2ZW2bF5pz31lttsdP1O+1HdIVe0TTME2Ewo2JoYiNk7G/nJQWRfZ8GeFeHdFZWD5d
 TIlivI3L9Dh7ihi4Wqo+8PzKx+BkGVaegGWQNXguQJ7pMidkbFA+L2U9hPmnC0HOs4So
 OttQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm5/mcnaLxJwNO9VxKgr9R+ApI0NeN+5iA4YBULEZe127d7uUT8kApYqxOVA3RxXKGeL8NL
X-Received: by 10.180.84.136 with SMTP id z8mr22740788wiy.63.1437991011643;
 Mon, 27 Jul 2015 02:56:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d7sm12755580wij.0.2015.07.27.02.56.49
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Mon, 27 Jul 2015 02:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:55:35 +0200
Message-ID: <6288420.ey92DFMaNu@xps13>
Organization: 6WIND
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.8 (Linux/4.0.4-2-ARCH; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C219F34510@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1437491784-26676-4-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
 <4617847.gsgatBVqCY@xps13>
 <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C219F34510@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] bonding: free queue memory in stop
	function
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 09:56:52 -0000

2015-07-27 08:31, Iremonger, Bernard:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > 2015-07-21 16:16, Bernard Iremonger:
> > > add function bond_ethdev_free_queues() and call from the
> > bond_ethdev_stop() function.
> > 
> > Other drivers free their queues when closing.
> > Why is it done in stop() for bonding?
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> The close() function  is empty in bonding so I decided to free the queues in the stop() function which is implemented.
> The stop() function is called before the close() function, so the effect is the same.

No, the effect is not the same. We can call stop() without close()
and then re-start the port.

> It would be better to free the queues in the close() function, I will move it there.

Yes please.