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 17B6D45D07; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:01:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2E584025D; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:01:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263064021F for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 18:01:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439BC1474; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 09:02:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.39.61] (JR4XG4HTQC.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.39.61]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DE023F6A8; Thu, 14 Nov 2024 09:01:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:01:41 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] dts: parameterize what ports the TG sends packets to Content-Language: en-GB To: jspewock@iol.unh.edu, npratte@iol.unh.edu, juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, yoan.picchi@foss.arm.com, thomas@monjalon.net, Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, probb@iol.unh.edu, wathsala.vithanage@arm.com, paul.szczepanek@arm.com, alex.chapman@arm.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: <20240821191557.18744-1-jspewock@iol.unh.edu> <20240923184235.22582-1-jspewock@iol.unh.edu> <20240923184235.22582-3-jspewock@iol.unh.edu> From: Luca Vizzarro In-Reply-To: <20240923184235.22582-3-jspewock@iol.unh.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Hi there, once again I am in agreement with Juraj, this approach may risk to complicate things further. As he mentioned, we should allow TestSuite to be marked for VFs and they should be able to automate the setup behind the scenes. If we wanted to distinguish VF and PF test cases, I think that's still doable, maybe group VF and PF ones together for easier setup and tear down. I re-iterate the problem with the commit subject being too long and verbose. Luca