> From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richard...@intel.com] > Sent: Friday, 2 May 2025 16.44 > > On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 04:35:08PM +0200, Burakov, Anatoly wrote: > > On 5/2/2025 2:37 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > > On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 01:27:29PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote: > > > > Test-pmd already has a way to run a list of commands from file, > but there > > > > is no way to pause execution for a specified amount of time > between two > > > > commands. This may be necessary for simple automation, > particularly for > > > > waiting on some asynchronous operation such as link status > update. > > > > > > > > Add a simple sleep command to wait until certain number of > milliseconds has > > > > passed. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > > index d4bb3ec998..1e429e6d0a 100644 > > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c > > > > @@ -151,6 +151,9 @@ static void cmd_help_long_parsed(void > *parsed_result, > > > > "quit\n" > > > > " Quit to prompt.\n\n" > > > > + > > > > + "sleep ms\n" > > > > + " Sleep for ms milliseconds.\n\n" > > > > ); > > > > } > > > > > > A "sleep" command, I would expect to sleep for a certain number of > seconds, > > > for compatibility e.g. with terminal "sleep" command. > > > To keep this as "ms" granularity, how about making it explicit as a > > > "sleep_ms" command. Alternatively, how about adding a usleep > command? [Not > > > sure "msleep" works, which is why I suggested sleep_ms instead] > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > I have no strong opinions on what it should do. My initial version > *was* a > > "sleep in seconds" command, I just thought that maybe someone would > want it > > more flexible. I suspect that actually "sleep" and second granularity > is > > just fine. > > > > I think we do need to support sub-second sleep granularity, though. If > we > only add "sleep" with time specified in seconds, I think we'd also need > to > add in usleep with micro-sec granularity too. > > Other alternatives: > - have sleep take an option 3rd parameter of time in > minisecond. So "sleep 1" is to sleep for one second, but "sleep 0 > 500" is > to sleep for 1/2 sec, and "sleep 2 750" is to sleep for 2.75 seconds. > - add floating point support to the cmdline library, and then allow > sleep time > specified in seconds using that. > > /Bruce
"sleep" should take one parameter: seconds. It can be float, or a separate "usleep" command taking a microseconds parameter can be added. This change (using float instead of int) or addition (usleep command) can be added later, if you like. Initially, I would lean towards a float parameter, but maybe it's easier for scripts to use "usleep" with an integer. In real life, the duration will probably be either "N" (i.e. a natural number) or "0.N" (i.e. less than one second), so an "usleep" might be just as good.
