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 C0ECDA0C40; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:02:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C57740689; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:02:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 954914067A for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:02:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B44FE5C012E; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:02:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 08 Jun 2021 08:02:44 -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= abZxgOAJBx3/awwHUGH4Pb/YL+AFhggRer/DU+VRdZ8=; b=Ut8II8FTySNVZm8z Jhk+PvhIH5RWWmP0L5q6o6Fnymv5iqSA9xCTB/qqtzI8+Jk/fod2Y5ehWy9uoqF3 6eM30P6tlZGNGQ5I4XB+xkSii6PC/mPJNYX7GSVAjyt5piKhH1q8LdUmmEBrLYkq ns8BAjszKeWclhpCJCNvzK/VzCemmDpfHuvIGMCngPhL1oftU7VxD4LZhdue4fpU fH1obH8lcxYhBN6DyW4Ii/aPyFb51S75RXGNqDOtDGgGU9DF4GQGy126LW+n0ttz Hg4oSVMboHuY5rsaky9gnQJOqm8PVEXWVerLN2+k4DsYl4ZKwE44RYyrSW9kt+tA QzR+xQ== 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=abZxgOAJBx3/awwHUGH4Pb/YL+AFhggRer/DU+VRd Z8=; b=Xctl2y1s+R54xntvlDnAuLyn+jE9xahSXDbMIKRJkbRQB4WqAM4K9nSA2 Sta+1AIkTTSKYM5cQ/bkVLY22zTtge4CYAq7BhJln0/1d9tuo248tlV/R6IWxZ++ iqboXRFP1EwsqWlRgT9Am4gUTOjSYnCrh9AK4yLy7Hki04lBeGAv3LEdH/VLSCUH mh0VCGdQhzXpVh+Kr7PYb9Uu9+evD3KKw/RH0l0D/84/fecTDxurg8dAHBSnarYr nXS+6q0NUtVFhVU5yWWh7HYunluNHgUgxQOr048x0TXypoGoHp1OffOyT/CC8BGx SoDiv19UYvt6o8f94yjeww4x81aXw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrfedtledgfeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:02:43 -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 14:02:39 +0200 Message-ID: <7731555.i7Uvaak7pH@thomas> In-Reply-To: <65e42e1c-8fb0-54f0-3bbb-daf4d19ac9af@oktetlabs.ru> References: <1614906276-34293-1-git-send-email-oulijun@huawei.com> <2021092.ZKMin5vSrh@thomas> <65e42e1c-8fb0-54f0-3bbb-daf4d19ac9af@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 12:39, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 6/8/21 1:22 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 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. > > To document is good, but I'm talking about more - > add checks in corresponding API functions and > return error. Yes I am OK with adding checks of the running process.