From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460685B2E for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:24:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD077225F7; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:24:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:24:17 -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=mesmtp; bh=Ftmukh8ZqWg+2I96cSjs+r6c65WJFJNljH6KTCMZODs=; b=h9D2pldFD0GT ysDoRGpJkqFmnRD7R1E9fG4AEyJGbG3x1eTSuB9yErW4gRWdxV6fLkwGLcjanIwg WPFQqwkCZ50PJpbqOmxPslDobe4THmEjz94Er/fyOZ+zzfOb2FRVY3ZzsVD4j3Vn RV1yYzUow2XuEAfBTjhZo9sbYeRwPwo= 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=fm1; bh=Ftmukh8ZqWg+2I96cSjs+r6c65WJFJNljH6KTCMZO Ds=; b=XtpC8UdyC+jaH5PZmVsXQl6rWoLHoFaOAL18SYpZA3CJeQYqLersAwcWq MzlxHE1Odb+T7YYltWqDEmCqX8KBTsmqHvDaxdAWAoFFyJv1HC385hX+Dv+MLTIO ak2JbczoFdIkdS1wLkHM7xXgnzRxoWDpRTtM1neGmqq5VpXYbuP0RixBy2pHWJ0D Xtay/yjjtVgN31oJlijrILiFRY7Mao+WBtosdipHtHx8myGqxxJwhxKsAzwckGrL I/mQuXvXmuLNWPFi2MY52ISn/3ydd7ue3pcTUlbsMEq1zoTrzatVJKlGqqnUsu5H ijlheKNydl2bFemRpp0HZXtnlaT9A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9023A102E0; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:24:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Iremonger, Bernard" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Andrew Rybchenko , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "ophirmu@mellanox.com" , "rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com" Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:24:20 +0200 Message-ID: <5775146.fcEkvuPi5X@xps> In-Reply-To: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C260D12CF2@IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20180907233929.21950-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <3763fc32-1db1-1220-079f-fbb6e9fff041@solarflare.com> <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C260D12CF2@IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/6] app/testpmd: allow detaching a port not closed 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: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 11:24:18 -0000 18/10/2018 12:51, Iremonger, Bernard: > From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:arybchenko@solarflare.com] > > On 10/18/18 4:23 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > The testpmd application aim is for testing; so order of operations > > > should not be enforced. > > > > > > There was a test to forbid detaching before closing a port. > > > However, it may interesting to test what happens in such case. > > > It is possible for a PMD to automatically close the port when detaching. > > > > Yes. In the case of net/sfc it requires a patch to call sfc_dev_close() from uninit. > > I think network PMD maintainers should be notified to double-check drivers. > > > > > in order to avoid a crash, it is checked that the port must be stopped > > > before detaching (as for closing). > > > > I thought that it is sufficient to stop traffic and the port may be stopped > > automatically by PMD. Not sure about it, just would like to clarify my previous > > notes. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon > > > > [...] > > This patch seems too risky as it may impact some of the PMD's. Yes, it will not work for all PMDs. If we want to allow this scenario, we'll need to improve some PMDs. This patch is just allowing to test the scenario. It will help PMD developers, so I think it is more helpful than risky.