Hi Reshma,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Reshma Pattan
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:11 PM
> To: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] app/test-pmd: fix nb_rxq and np_txq checks
>
> Made testpmd changes to validate nb_rxq/nb_txq zero
> value changes of librte_ether.
>
> Signed-off-by: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan at intel.com>
> ---
> app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 11 +++++------
> app/test-pmd/parameters.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> index 6d28c1b..fa666d2 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> /*-
> * BSD LICENSE
> *
> - * Copyright(c) 2010-2015 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + * Copyright(c) 2010-2016 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> * Copyright(c) 2014 6WIND S.A.
> * All rights reserved.
> *
> @@ -1163,17 +1163,16 @@ cmd_config_rx_tx_parsed(void *parsed_result,
> printf("Please stop all ports first\n");
> return;
> }
> -
> if (!strcmp(res->name, "rxq")) {
> - if (res->value <= 0) {
> - printf("rxq %d invalid - must be > 0\n", res->value);
> + if (!res->value && !nb_txq) {
> + printf("Warning: Either rx or tx queues should non be
> zero\n");
Typo: Either "should be non-zero" or "should not be zero". Same below.
> return;
> }
> nb_rxq = res->value;
> }
> else if (!strcmp(res->name, "txq")) {
> - if (res->value <= 0) {
> - printf("txq %d invalid - must be > 0\n", res->value);
> + if (!res->value && !nb_rxq) {
> + printf("Warning: Either rx or tx queues should non be
> zero\n");
> return;
> }
> nb_txq = res->value;
[...]
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> index 1319917..4c8afba 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> /*-
> * BSD LICENSE
> *
> - * Copyright(c) 2010-2015 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> + * Copyright(c) 2010-2016 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
> * All rights reserved.
> *
> * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ init_fwd_streams(void)
> portid_t pid;
> struct rte_port *port;
> streamid_t sm_id, nb_fwd_streams_new;
> + queueid_t q;
>
> /* set socket id according to numa or not */
> FOREACH_PORT(pid, ports) {
> @@ -643,7 +644,12 @@ init_fwd_streams(void)
> }
> }
>
> - nb_fwd_streams_new = (streamid_t)(nb_ports * nb_rxq);
> + q = RTE_MAX(nb_rxq, nb_txq);
> + if (q == 0) {
> + printf("Fail:Cannot allocate fwd streams as number of
> queues is 0\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> + nb_fwd_streams_new = (streamid_t)(nb_ports * q);
> if (nb_fwd_streams_new == nb_fwd_streams)
> return 0;
> /* clear the old */
> @@ -955,6 +961,12 @@ start_packet_forwarding(int with_tx_first)
> portid_t pt_id;
> streamid_t sm_id;
>
> + if (strcmp(cur_fwd_eng->fwd_mode_name, "rxonly") == 0 &&
> !nb_rxq)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "rxq are 0, cannot use rxonly fwd
> mode\n");
> +
> + if (strcmp(cur_fwd_eng->fwd_mode_name, "txonly") == 0 &&
> !nb_txq)
> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "txq are 0, cannot use txonly fwd
> mode\n");
> +
Should we check if we have both rxq and txq > 0 when running
the other forwarding modes that need both RX/TX queues?
> if (all_ports_started() == 0) {
> printf("Not all ports were started\n");
> return;
> @@ -2037,6 +2049,9 @@ main(int argc, char** argv)
> if (argc > 1)
> launch_args_parse(argc, argv);
>
> + if (!nb_rxq && !nb_txq)
> + printf("Warning: Either rx or tx queues should be non-
> zero\n");
> +
> if (nb_rxq > nb_txq)
> printf("Warning: nb_rxq=%d enables RSS configuration, "
> "but nb_txq=%d will prevent to fully test it.\n",
Since we are allowing testpmd to run with nb_txq = 0, if nb_rxq = 1 and nb_txq
= 0,
this warning above will be showed, because before if nb_rxq > nb_txq,
it would mean that nb_rxq is at least 2, so RSS is enabled, but now it might
not be,
so this message has to be changed.
> --
> 1.7.4.1
