From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH / RFC ] ethdev: Allow rte_eth_dev_configure
	with zero RX/TX queues
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:53:34 +0200
Message-ID: <1881092.YNl14ETpPN@xps13>
References: <20160516113349.7d2a992f@miho>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, reshma.pattan@intel.com
To: Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f43.google.com (mail-wm0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F188CC454
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:53:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f43.google.com with SMTP id r201so56255707wme.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 08:53:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160516113349.7d2a992f@miho>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-05-16 11:33, Simon Kagstrom:
> This allows releasing RX/TX queue memory.
> ---
> We're using DPDK 16.04 and have a test suite which performs a sequence
> of separate tests of the type
> 
>    allocate mempool
>    rte_eth_dev_configure(port, n_rxq, n_txq, ...)
>    setup rx/tx queues
>    rte_eth_dev_start(port)
> 
>    <perform actual test>
> 
>    stop rx/tx queues
>    rte_eth_dev_stop(port)
> 
> -> rte_eth_dev_configure(port, 0, 0, ...)
>    
>    check that there are no leaks from the mempool
> 
> The crucial point is the marked line above. This is done so that the
> rx_queue_release/tx_queue_release callbacks in the PMD is called, so
> that mbufs allocated by the driver is released.

I think you are trying to use a side effect of rte_eth_dev_configure().
After calling rte_eth_dev_stop(), I would say the clean-up should be done
by rte_eth_dev_close().
Why not using close?