On 8/28/2017 10:55 AM, Gaëtan Rivet wrote:

Hi Raslan,

Redoing the review with the remarks from Thomas in mind.

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 05:37:04PM +0300, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:

quoted

Added hotplug in testpmd, to be able to test hotplug function
in the PMD's.

Signed-off-by: Raslan Darawsheh <redacted>
---
 app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 app/test-pmd/testpmd.h |  1 +
 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
index cd8c358..b32a368 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c

@@ -716,6 +716,9 @@ static void cmd_help_long_parsed(void *parsed_result,
 			"port config (port_id|all) l2-tunnel E-tag"
 			" (enable|disable)\n"
 			"    Enable/disable the E-tag support.\n\n"
+
+			" device remove (device)\n"

I think (device) might be hard to understand for a user.
Maybe (device name)?

I am suspicious on adding new root level command to testpmd, it is
getting bigger, each command looks OK on its own context, but as a whole
app getting more confusing [1].

Since dealing with device is kind of new, it can be OK to create new
command tree, but there are already hotplug commands per port:
"port attach #PCI|#VDEV_NAME"
"port detach #P"

perhaps it can be good to keep "attach", "detach" keywords for device to
be consistent?

"device attach #name"
"device detach #name"

Also a show equivalent can be added to work in device level:
"show device info"


[1]
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-August/072764.html