From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com (mail-wr1-f66.google.com [209.85.221.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F9FD1B6E3 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:01:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id 63-v6so6121597wra.11 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:01:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HzTolLeB/C1HHmw30AI3D0dfUDwVVU4Jzel2m0spynU=; b=Ee7vSAl8JsaHKh8nNNStYcIrAqPmrAMksTQCtoSGeahltHkUhQz+lcHLaJeFlSG+d3 fmAUp7CfhZyvHvu1LKjXfpZ8c7PBLcxcHbmyAVJz6aHNO7eREh1jzHzkWURbId1A731A jLNcR7jv3bp06UaWxbkd1IMn3gOHOMYbTwL9HMvJbIjxXC+z561NT3FEsmlzBumGgCfU bTBLGEbStC679Nvb0IGIwmg4csycRrXZzM82nB+o1pPtsy4ZuwMII26RIgmF/T2ZOICx a9qODiO21RagZQcdNy9AUc82BL5DnNtkEE5KexpF4ZDuA98ud2cJWjBXhJD/NZK1gsdb jP3w== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfogoEC6/Ux0TvOVjf/DfT8uwQmSkR3qagCn5uzvcK02vdUzYVBQF mL8dlh0glpMi4gbZ8zJ/L/4uNK20gt+Xp0igXTuBVQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62o88DrV1qfdItG4FNvVGjX3Yfvlmou7KsqJVmxR0o71EuN8dLJlZyRCS5XvhK/RToRn01oc94xOyV0WYeXqS0= X-Received: by 2002:adf:b519:: with SMTP id a25-v6mr22483158wrd.273.1539183705680; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 08:01:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180911232906.18352-1-dg@adax.com> <20180927003256.6901-1-dg@adax.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dan Gora Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:01:09 -0300 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Igor Ryzhov , Stephen Hemminger Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/6] kni: add API to set link status on kernel interface 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: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:01:46 -0000 On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:16 AM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > On 9/27/2018 1:32 AM, Dan Gora wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Attached is version 3 of a patchset to add a new API function to > > set the link status on kernel interfaces created with the KNI kernel > > module. > > > > v3 > > ==== > > * Use separate function to test rte_kni_update_link() in 'test' app. > > > > * Separate changes to 'test' app into separate patch to facilitate > > possible merge with https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/44730/ > > > > * Remove changes to set KNI interfaces to 'up' in example/kni > > > >> v2 > >> ==== > >> > >> * Fix bug where "Fixed" and "AutoNeg" were transposed in the link > >> status log message. > >> > >> * Add rte_kni_update_link() to rte_kni_version.map > >> > >> * Add rte_kni_update_link() tests to kni_autotest > >> > >> * Update examples/kni to continuously monitor link status and > >> update the corresponding kernel interface with > >> rte_kni_update_link(). > >> > >> * Minor improvements to examples/kni: Add log message showing how > >> to show/zero stats. Improve zeroing statistics. > >> > >> Note that checkpatches.sh compains about patch 1/5, but this appears > >> to be a bug with check-symbol-change or something. If I move the > >> fragment of the patch modifying rte_kni_version.map to the bottom of > >> the patch file, it doesn't complain any more... I just don't really > >> have time to investigate this right now. > > > > thanks > > dan > > > > Dan Gora (6): > > kni: add API to set link status on kernel interface > > kni: add link status test > > kni: set default carrier state to 'off' > > examples/kni: monitor and update link status continually > > examples/kni: add log msgs to show and clear stats > > examples/kni: improve zeroing statistics > > Hi Dan, > > We are a little away to integration deadline, it is good to clarify the status > of the patchset. > > There are a few change requests to this patchset: > 1- 4/6, there is an open on adding command line option to control monitor/set > link status. No, I don't have any plans to add a command line option to do this. Again, there is no reason for a command line option. > 2- Dropping 6/6, I guess you already agreed on this. No, I showed you that that patch to fix zeroing the statistics would actually increase performance. You just never responded to that email. > 3- 1/6, to have or not the log message. I included a proposal in my last email. Please take a look at that and respond. > I would like to see the patchset in the release, what do you think about above > actions? I'm incredibly frustrated with this whole process to be honest... d