On Wed, Jul 2, 2025 at 12:23 PM Dean Marx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu> wrote:

> Remove unnecessary verification step in the start method
> of TestPmdShell which checks the link status.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dean Marx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu>
> ---
>  dts/framework/remote_session/testpmd_shell.py | 7 -------
>  1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/testpmd_shell.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/testpmd_shell.py
> index 299887dd80..6d75f89969 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/testpmd_shell.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/testpmd_shell.py
> @@ -1578,13 +1578,6 @@ def start(self, verify: bool = True) -> None:
>                  self._logger.debug(f"Failed to start packet forwarding:
> \n{start_cmd_output}")
>                  raise InteractiveCommandExecutionError("Testpmd failed to
> start packet forwarding.")
>
> -            number_of_ports = len(self._app_params.allowed_ports or [])
> -            for port_id in range(number_of_ports):
> -                if not self.wait_link_status_up(port_id):
> -                    raise InteractiveCommandExecutionError(
> -                        "Not all ports came up after starting packet
> forwarding in testpmd."
> -                    )
> -
>

Okay, this makes sense given how VF info presents in testpmd port info (no
link status). But, I wonder if it makes sense to preserve this in the case
of PF runs? Maybe you can raise this item at the next DTS meeting for
discussion? It could make sense to support this check for PFs for 25.11.
Anyhow we can discuss.


>      def stop(self, verify: bool = True) -> str:
>          """Stop packet forwarding.
>
> --
> 2.49.0
>
>
Reviewed-by: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
Tested-by: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>