Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 7/7] app/testpmd: check not detaching device twice

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

23/10/2018 14:03, Thomas Monjalon:
> 23/10/2018 12:01, Iremonger, Bernard:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > > The command "port detach" is removing the EAL rte_device of the ethdev
> > > port specified as parameter.
> > > 
> > > After detaching, the pointer, which maps a port to its device, is resetted. This
> > 
> > Typo:  "resetted" should be "reset"
> > 
> > > way, it is possible to check whether a port is still associated to a (not
> > > removed) device.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > > ---
> > >  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
> > >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
> > > 14647fa19..d5998fddc 100644
> > > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > > @@ -2353,8 +2353,17 @@ setup_attached_port(portid_t pi)  void
> > > detach_port(portid_t port_id)  {
> > > +	struct rte_device *dev;
> > > +	portid_t sibling;
> > > +
> > >  	printf("Removing a device...\n");
> > 
> > The functionality of the detach_port() function has changed now to
> > removing a device, should the function name be changed to reflect
> > the new functionality.
> 
> No it doesn't change, it has always removed the rte_device of the port.
> But the naming is a bit strange, I agree.
> I just changed the log to make it a bit clearer.
> 
> > How about detach_device() instead of detach detach_port().
> 
> The strange thing with testpmd is that every commands take a port id.
> The rte_device is hidden in testpmd.
> So the detach command is detaching the underlying device of the port,
> and all its sibling ports of course.
> 
> What about detach_device_of_port() ?

Or detach_port_device()?

> [...]
> > > -	if (rte_dev_remove(rte_eth_devices[port_id].device) != 0) {
> > > +	if (rte_dev_remove(dev) != 0) {
> > >  		TESTPMD_LOG(ERR, "Failed to detach port %u\n", port_id);
> > 
> > Should the log message be ( ERR "Failed to detach device %s\n", dev->name) ?
> 
> Yes!
> 
> [...]
> > > -	printf("Port %u is detached. Now total ports is %d\n",
> > > -			port_id, nb_ports);
> > 
> > How about printf("Device %s is detached, Now total ports is %d\n"
> > 	dev->name, nb_ports);
> 
> The issue is that we cannot get the device name after detach.
> I can reword it differently:
> 	Device of port %u is detached, Now total ports is %d
> 
> 
> 
>