From: Nicholas Pratte <npratte@iol.unh.edu>
To: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
Cc: yoan.picchi@foss.arm.com, probb@iol.unh.edu,
paul.szczepanek@arm.com, thomas@monjalon.net,
Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com, Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com,
juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech, wathsala.vithanage@arm.com,
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:54:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKXZ7egonYtTivf-SZB=ixv+Utgpww8Sku9Jy8xj58mgV4KNwQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAA20UQhTvZqZpLQz5X57XHT8Ouaab+MPuGz1dv2S=Nn4RwWJA@mail.gmail.com>
<snip>
> You're right that in most cases it would come from the stop output,
> but the output from that stop command has one other thing as well that
> I would consider valuable which is statistics of packets handled by
> ports specifically for the duration of the packet forwarding you are
> stopping. It is also true that sending other testpmd commands while
> verbose output is being sent will change what is collected, so I
> didn't want to tie the method specifically to the stop command since
> if you did a start command then checked port statistics for example,
> it would consume all of the verbose output up until the command to
> check port statistics.
>
> For the reason stated above I think it actually might make sense to
> make it so that every testpmd method (including ones that currently
> return dataclasses) return their original, unmodified collected output
> from the testpmd shell as well. Things like port stats can return both
> in a tuple potentially. This way if there is asynchronous output like
> there is with verbose output other commands don't completely remove
> it.
I agree! I think giving each testpmd method its own output would add
more consistency. An idea I had floating around that kind of relates
to your suggestion above was introducing some instance variables that
could enable the testpmd shell object to be smart enough to
automatically scan, and keep a record of, any verbose output that
comes out across any command run. The TestPMDShell class could track
whether verbose mode is on or not, and if True, run additional logic
to scan for verbose output and add it to a data structure for access
every time a command is run. Then users, from the perspective of
writing a test suite, could do something like 'output in
testpmd.verbose_output', where verbose_output is an instance data
structure of the TestPMDShell. This might be overcomplicated to
implement, but it was an idea I had that might make using verbose mode
more streamlined. What are your thoughts?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-02 14:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-29 20:39 [PATCH v1 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-07-29 20:39 ` [PATCH v1 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-07-30 13:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-07-30 13:34 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-07-30 15:41 ` Nicholas Pratte
2024-07-30 21:30 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-02 14:54 ` Nicholas Pratte [this message]
2024-08-02 17:38 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-05 13:20 ` Nicholas Pratte
2024-07-30 21:33 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-01 8:43 ` Luca Vizzarro
2024-08-02 13:40 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-01 8:41 ` Luca Vizzarro
2024-08-02 13:35 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-08 20:36 ` [PATCH v3 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-08-08 20:36 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-08-08 21:49 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-08-12 17:32 ` Nicholas Pratte
2024-09-09 11:44 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-17 13:40 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-09-18 8:09 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-18 16:34 ` [PATCH v4 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-09-18 16:34 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-09-18 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-09-18 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-09-19 9:02 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-20 15:53 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-09-23 13:30 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-19 12:35 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-20 15:55 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-09-25 15:46 ` [PATCH v6 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-09-25 15:46 ` [PATCH v6 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-09-26 8:25 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-26 14:43 ` Jeremy Spewock
2024-09-26 15:47 ` [PATCH v7 0/1] dts: testpmd verbose parser jspewock
2024-09-26 15:47 ` [PATCH v7 1/1] dts: add text parser for testpmd verbose output jspewock
2024-09-27 9:32 ` Juraj Linkeš
2024-09-27 11:48 ` Luca Vizzarro
2024-09-30 13:41 ` Juraj Linkeš
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='CAKXZ7egonYtTivf-SZB=ixv+Utgpww8Sku9Jy8xj58mgV4KNwQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=npratte@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=Luca.Vizzarro@arm.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jspewock@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech \
--cc=paul.szczepanek@arm.com \
--cc=probb@iol.unh.edu \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=wathsala.vithanage@arm.com \
--cc=yoan.picchi@foss.arm.com \
/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).