23/10/2018 12:01, Iremonger, Bernard:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net]
> > The command "port detach" is removing the EAL rte_device of the ethdev
> > port specified as parameter.
> >
> > After detaching, the pointer, which maps a port to its device, is resetted.
> > This
>
> Typo: "resetted" should be "reset"
>
> > way, it is possible to check whether a port is still associated to a (not
> > removed) device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
> > ---
> > app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
> > 14647fa19..d5998fddc 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > @@ -2353,8 +2353,17 @@ setup_attached_port(portid_t pi) void
> > detach_port(portid_t port_id) {
> > + struct rte_device *dev;
> > + portid_t sibling;
> > +
> > printf("Removing a device...\n");
>
> The functionality of the detach_port() function has changed now to
> removing a device, should the function name be changed to reflect
> the new functionality.
No it doesn't change, it has always removed the rte_device of the port.
But the naming is a bit strange, I agree.
I just changed the log to make it a bit clearer.
> How about detach_device() instead of detach detach_port().
The strange thing with testpmd is that every commands take a port id.
The rte_device is hidden in testpmd.
So the detach command is detaching the underlying device of the port,
and all its sibling ports of course.
What about detach_device_of_port() ?
[...]
> > - if (rte_dev_remove(rte_eth_devices[port_id].device) != 0) {
> > + if (rte_dev_remove(dev) != 0) {
> > TESTPMD_LOG(ERR, "Failed to detach port %u\n", port_id);
>
> Should the log message be ( ERR "Failed to detach device %s\n", dev->name) ?
Yes!
[...]
> > - printf("Port %u is detached. Now total ports is %d\n",
> > - port_id, nb_ports);
>
> How about printf("Device %s is detached, Now total ports is %d\n"
> dev->name, nb_ports);
The issue is that we cannot get the device name after detach.
I can reword it differently:
Device of port %u is detached, Now total ports is %d
