From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethdev: add new RX/TX queue state arrays in rte_eth_dev_data Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:23:35 +0200 Message-ID: <1926548.3ArlD1O00b@xps13> References: <1442402465-20158-1-git-send-email-pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836A870DF@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "De Lara Guarch, Pablo" Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f180.google.com (mail-wi0-f180.google.com [209.85.212.180]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83AA5CE7 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 09:24:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wiclk2 with SMTP id lk2so14902298wic.1 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2015 00:24:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2015-09-16 21:22, De Lara Guarch, Pablo: > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > Why not something like: > > ret = dev->dev_ops->tx_queue_start(dev, tx_queue_id); > > if (ret == 0) > > dev->data->tx_queue_state[tx_queue_id] = > > RTE_ETH_QUEUE_STATE_START; > > > > Same for dev_stop and RX. > > Then you hopefully wouldn't need to update each and every PMD, > > only rteh_ethdev* would be affected. > > Problem is that some PMDs call internally queue_start/stop, but not the generic rte_eth_rx_queue_start (stop and RX), > so in that case this would not update the state of the queue. Why not changing PMD to call rte_eth_rx_queue_start? Do you think it will be too much error prone for later updates?