From: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
To: Dean Marx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com, dev@dpdk.org, Paul.Szczepanek@arm.com,
abailey@iol.unh.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dts: testpmd link check on port start
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 13:00:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJvnSUAXH8cv0JvqV2o6iiQ6x=930P2bnuCd4714QQetXSvJJA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABD7UXOSvFY65O7djZCH7K1C9jwxNNwAq6QJktS1FJDGS2yuaQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1098 bytes --]
On Thu, Nov 6, 2025 at 12:15 PM Dean Marx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 2:50 PM Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >
> > In addition, the interval in
> > between checking the link state has been reduced in
> > order to speed up the execution.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
> > Tested-by: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>
>
> <snip>
> > if "Link status: up" in port_info:
> > break
> > - time.sleep(0.5)
> > + time.sleep(0.25)
>
> What's the rationale for changing this, just wondering?
>
See the commit blurb above - there will be many function calls to functions
which are decorated with _requires_started_ports during the DTS execution.
That means every time that happens it will enter the block you see above.
If we add .5 seconds to each of these function calls, it will slow down the
execution. It probably isn't a huge deal but the downside of decreasing the
time interval is pretty much nothing.
>
> Reviewed-by: Dean Marx <dmarx@iol.unh.edu>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1944 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-06 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-08 1:41 [PATCH] dts: add dpdk shell warm up period Patrick Robb
2025-09-08 1:57 ` Patrick Robb
2025-09-08 10:03 ` Luca Vizzarro
2025-09-08 13:21 ` Patrick Robb
2025-11-05 19:49 ` [PATCH v2] dts: testpmd link check on port start Patrick Robb
2025-11-06 15:05 ` Andrew Bailey
2025-11-06 17:14 ` Dean Marx
2025-11-06 18:00 ` Patrick Robb [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAJvnSUAXH8cv0JvqV2o6iiQ6x=930P2bnuCd4714QQetXSvJJA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=probb@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com \
--cc=Paul.Szczepanek@arm.com \
--cc=abailey@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=dmarx@iol.unh.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).