From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] app/testpmd: app/testpmd: add device removal
	command
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 18:18:34 +0200
Message-ID: <2302304.eNG2ySBljJ@xps>
References: <1503499024-12480-1-git-send-email-rasland@mellanox.com>
 <20170823150909.GA8124@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>, jingjing.wu@intel.com,
 dev@dpdk.org, salehals@mellanox.com
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DAA7D3A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 18:18:35 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20170823150909.GA8124@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

23/08/2017 17:09, Ga=EBtan Rivet:
> Hello Raslan,
>=20
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 05:37:04PM +0300, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> > Added hotplug in testpmd, to be able to test hotplug function
> > in the PMD's.
> >=20
> > Signed-off-by: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>
[...]
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c
> > @@ -716,6 +716,9 @@ static void cmd_help_long_parsed(void *parsed_resul=
t,
> >  			"port config (port_id|all) l2-tunnel E-tag"
> >  			" (enable|disable)\n"
> >  			"    Enable/disable the E-tag support.\n\n"
> > +
> > +			" device remove (device)\n"
> > +			"    Remove a device"
>=20
> I think it should still be a part of the "port" command set (port
> attach|detach|stop|close, etc).

I tend to disagree.
As far as I know, we use port for ethdev or cryptodev.
Here we want to deal with EAL rte_device.

> This would probably be easier to understand for users.

[...]
> Continuing on using the port ...
> format, then the port_id should allow to remove it instead of the device
> identifier.
> Using the device identifier will complexify your implementation.
[...]
> 	eth_dev =3D &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> 	bus =3D rte_bus_find_by_device(eth_dev->device);

Note that we are going to remove eth_dev->device which implies eth_dev
but maybe also more device interfaces for the same HW.
That's why I think we need to distinguish port and device somehow.