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 3D32145BC0; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:52:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B10F42E48; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:52:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-yw1-f170.google.com (mail-yw1-f170.google.com [209.85.128.170]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F57342E10 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:52:28 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-yw1-f170.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6e3c3da5bcdso55139307b3.2 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 09:52:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1730220748; x=1730825548; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QPwR2cZLQN0/OiT3KYBT0Lk8MAOJqF12kh9nXLHHyLM=; b=N7ksscs5ZxeKQ/JKYRELaZ23tQ4X+nrRwZbVryawjYUwa8wnSoeWPCnvHnA6pJKoC9 xh9ZeBJB8Ik61aSy5G7gNFKoBCdZWs460ajRQFUg7iZoHhY0zuI//+0FBVyrdWppUqgR NqWGVm6i3k9XHIhHH8ZPS+BTZHvT5Kr5PgMF0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730220748; x=1730825548; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=QPwR2cZLQN0/OiT3KYBT0Lk8MAOJqF12kh9nXLHHyLM=; b=irsjtnywkGC+STLCm0FktV7jZ/eYYnkqEBDSMi69LEvZFEDzSqBUomUYBc3kypEeKm MUnt5koL0kove3najK+ug6J8nb6Y5rZgIMKblHCSG4MVykBRfw1sRDfxHr6T4vLH1IpQ sgOpOO7W6ofpCxfETxjbVI/GV3VPEKUeviYjoMCwPOwj7KooggmtdbxO9pP32wTekr32 BrXEvdmjucxobVZ6XZIFhhYUgvrYWSjpdbxfQZtn35oV9QBBrs4QZbSSBFRyVv91gRb0 zI5I90ET8N3RG4Pm/MrurQQo7tOdftLoo/5Tre2u62m+ZZ1RPN5KfIAOyIavbUirkTKM mLpw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXqymy2pdU10g/fBn+Ccn3AyHmrDuExXByW0GSsPVLLpwvQtocP/0LvIxU6EvIsC3/MZ3o=@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxRMEV4XqG4XHh5DW1jsaHW9pxtMwZcHz1MWQmktai5qkt5bV2Z cywGUtx00pdcxeAfyK6HMcvhjGmLZiPyyaUuICWLHpB50P/QAa9/vrpba+HyEGoJ2BDsmqvaxFA QK5SL7j1ZtBzG17CQM+ooJZwleQgV6fXnFmHrPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH/aDGTfykWMoStqV0RyfQ/v9GOlxZfK0Z7eb2eptTx51MLeRzhlDUdH74qxqBL2Y/H65Pt19N01+gsudfRgQI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:89:b0:6e6:248:341e with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6ea3b72366amr4927037b3.0.1730220747765; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 09:52:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240821184305.28028-2-npratte@iol.unh.edu> <20240821184305.28028-3-npratte@iol.unh.edu> In-Reply-To: <20240821184305.28028-3-npratte@iol.unh.edu> From: Dean Marx Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:52:42 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] dts: rework port attributes in config module To: Nicholas Pratte Cc: yoan.picchi@foss.arm.com, luca.vizzarro@arm.com, probb@iol.unh.edu, paul.szczepanek@arm.com, Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, jspewock@iol.unh.edu, alex.chapman@arm.com, dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000000dd7350625a0698d" 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 --0000000000000dd7350625a0698d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 2:43=E2=80=AFPM Nicholas Pratte wrote: > The current design requires that a peer pci port is identified so that > test suites can create the correct port links. While this can work, it > also creates a lot of room for user error. Instead, devices should be > given a unique identifier which is referenced in defined test runs. > > Both defined testbeds for the SUT and TG must have an equal number of > specified ports. In each given array or ports, SUT port 0 is connected > to TG port 0, SUT port 1 is connected to TG port 1, etc. > > Bugzilla ID: 1478 > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Pratte > Aside from Jeremy/Juraj's comments and assuming this will get extended off the pydantic series: Reviewed-by: Dean Marx --0000000000000dd7350625a0698d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 2:43=E2=80=AFPM N= icholas Pratte <npratte@iol.unh.e= du> wrote:
The current design requires that a peer pci po= rt is identified so that
test suites can create the correct port links. While this can work, it
also creates a lot of room for user error. Instead, devices should be
given a unique identifier which is referenced in defined test runs.

Both defined testbeds for the SUT and TG must have an equal number of
specified ports. In each given array or ports, SUT port 0 is connected
to TG port 0, SUT port 1 is connected to TG port 1, etc.

Bugzilla ID: 1478

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Pratte <npratte@iol.unh.edu>

Aside from Jeremy/Juraj's comments and assuming this will get ext= ended off the pydantic series:

Reviewed-by: Dean M= arx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu>=C2= =A0
--0000000000000dd7350625a0698d--