On 10/23/2018 1:37 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > I want to submit two more patches to clean testpmd for attach/detach. > > I propose to drop this patch from this series, > and I will submit a new series dedicated to testpmd cleanup, > including this patch.
Got the set without this patch, please sent it separately. > > > 23/10/2018 14:13, Thomas Monjalon: >> 23/10/2018 14:03, Thomas Monjalon: >>> 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() ? >> >> Or detach_port_device()? >> >>> [...] >>>>> - 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 > > > >
