From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] examples/l3fwd: Handle SIGINT and
 SIGTERM in l3fwd
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:09:11 -0800
Message-ID: <20151230180911.2a14218b@xeon-e3>
References: <1451011032-83106-1-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com>
 <1451431644-98362-1-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com>
 <1451431644-98362-4-git-send-email-zhihong.wang@intel.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836ADF284@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE094186474F@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
To: "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com
 [209.85.220.48]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76A4268A5
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 31 Dec 2015 03:09:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id uo6so124147794pac.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 18:09:02 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <8F6C2BD409508844A0EFC19955BE094186474F@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
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>

On Thu, 31 Dec 2015 01:44:20 +0000
"Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com> wrote:

> > > +#define PORT_IDLE 0
> > > +#define PORT_INIT 1
> > > +#define PORT_WORK 2
> > > +#define PORT_STOP 3
> > > +#define PORT_QUIT 4  
> > 
> > Seems ok, but over-complicated.
> > I think all you need is just IDLE, INIT, QUIT.  
> 
> Yes for l2/l3fwd 3 states are enough.
> I implement a full state machine so it can also serve as an example on how to do this in other cases, like where stop might be called before or during init.

These are examples, it is better to have as little code as necessary to get the
job done. That makes the example clearer.  Adding extra unnecessary complexity
just makes it harder to understand.