On 2/7/2021 2:47 AM, Li, Xiaoyun wrote:
Hi
-----Original Message-----
From: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
Sent: Friday, February 5, 2021 21:39
To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Li, Xiaoyun <xiaoyun...@intel.com>;
Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremon...@intel.com>; Singh, Jasvinder
<jasvinder.si...@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing...@intel.com>; Dumitrescu,
Cristian <cristian.dumitre...@intel.com>; Adrien Mazarguil
<adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>
Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; sta...@dpdk.org
Subject: [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix meter commands help strings
Helps strings syntax is "command : description", the 'command' part was missing,
updated command help strings.
Fixes: 281eeb8afc55 ("app/testpmd: add commands for metering and policing")
Fixes: 30ffb4e67ee3 ("app/testpmd: add commands traffic metering and
policing")
Fixes: e63b50162aa3 ("app/testpmd: clean metering and policing commands")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
---
Cc: jasvinder.si...@intel.com
Cc: cristian.dumitre...@intel.com
- "set port meter dscp table" documented with 'port_id' & 'mtr_id', but
command itself is not requiring it, can be better to double check the
intention in the command.
- In command "show port meter stats <port_id> <mtr_id> yes|no", it is
not clear what 'yes|no' is, can be better to have a 'clear' keyword
there: "show port meter stats <port_id> <mtr_id> clear yes|no"
- 'meter' commands seems using many high level commands, that is harder
to remember when you take all commands into account:
"show port meter ..."
"add port meter ..."
"del port meter ..."
"create port meter ..."
"enable port meter ..."
"disable port meter ..."
"set port meter ..."
And some high level commands created just for 'meter'. Instead I think
it is better to group the commands, like:
"port meter [add,del,create,enable,disable] ..."
"show port meter ..."
It is already too late but it worth to keep in mind for the possible
future update.
---
app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 2 +-
app/test-pmd/cmdline_mtr.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++--------------
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
<snip>
@@ -827,7 +827,9 @@ static void cmd_create_port_meter_parsed(void
*parsed_result, cmdline_parse_inst_t cmd_create_port_meter = {
.f = cmd_create_port_meter_parsed,
.data = NULL,
-.help_str = "Create port meter",
+.help_str = "create port meter <port_id> <mtr_id> <profile_id> "
+"yes|no R|Y|G|D R|Y|G|D R|Y|G|D <stats_mask> <shared> "
It seems it should be R|Y|G|D|r|y|g|d R|Y|G|D|r|y|g|d R|Y|G|D|r|y|g|d.
What about just use <g_action> <y_action> <r_action> as in cmd_help_long_parsed?
Yes action can be both upper case and lower case, but both does same thing, so I
chose only uppercase ones to make it more readable.
The "<g_action>" makes it easy understand what the field is for, but for the
user that doesn't know what is "g_action" or what can be the values "g_action"
can take, there is no place to get this information. That is why I find it
useful to provide values can take if they are fixed.
+"<use_pre_meter_color> [<dscp_tbl_entry0> <dscp_tbl_entry1>
+...<dscp_tbl_entry63>]",
.tokens = {
(void *)&cmd_create_port_meter_create,
(void *)&cmd_create_port_meter_port,
<snip>
cmd_set_port_meter_dscp_table_parsed(void *parsed_result,
cmdline_parse_inst_t cmd_set_port_meter_dscp_table = {
.f = cmd_set_port_meter_dscp_table_parsed,
.data = NULL,
-.help_str = "Update port meter dscp table",
+.help_str = "set port meter dscp table "
+"[<dscp_tbl_entry0> <dscp_tbl_entry1> ... <dscp_tbl_entry63>]",
It should be "set port meter dscp table <port_id> <mtr_id> "
"[<dscp_tbl_entry0> <dscp_tbl_entry1> ...
<dscp_tbl_entry63>]"?
Because in parse_multi_token_string(), it starts from port_id. Hmmm... The code
seems very messy, not inconsistent.
Please see my comment above, copied here:
- "set port meter dscp table" documented with 'port_id' & 'mtr_id', but
command itself is not requiring it, can be better to double check the
intention in the command.
If you check the code, port_id and mtr_id is not there.
.tokens = {
(void *)&cmd_set_port_meter_dscp_table_set,
(void *)&cmd_set_port_meter_dscp_table_port,
@@ -1276,7 +1279,8 @@ static void
cmd_set_port_meter_policer_action_parsed(void *parsed_result,
cmdline_parse_inst_t cmd_set_port_meter_policer_action = {
.f = cmd_set_port_meter_policer_action_parsed,
.data = NULL,
-.help_str = "Set port meter policer action",
+.help_str = "set port meter policer action <port_id> <mtr_id> "
+"<action_mask> <actiono> [<action1> <action2>]",
<action0>[ <action1> <action2>]?
ack
Since it seems only 3 actions exist (action_mask & (~0x7UL), check action mask
part in parse function).
And each action seems to be G|Y|R|D|g|y|r|d. hmmm. Messy code...
.tokens = {
(void *)&cmd_set_port_meter_policer_action_set,
(void *)&cmd_set_port_meter_policer_action_port,
<snip>
--
2.29.2
