From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Remy Horton Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] app/test-pmd: add Port Representor commands Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 07:22:36 +0000 Message-ID: <4547e589-e092-7019-72be-e0ec7f5076e2@intel.com> References: <20180108143720.7994-1-remy.horton@intel.com> <20180108143720.7994-6-remy.horton@intel.com> <117e871e-faf8-a38e-8baa-59c01bc00ba4@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: John McNamara , Wenzhuo Lu , Jingjing Wu To: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F5D8199B0 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:22:39 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <117e871e-faf8-a38e-8baa-59c01bc00ba4@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 09/01/2018 22:10, Ferruh Yigit wrote: [..] >> +Adding a representor for a VF requires specifying the PF in >> +``Bus_DomBDF`` format alongside the index number of the VF:: >> + >> + testpmd> add representor pci_0000:81:00.0 0 > > I am for grouping port related commands under "port" command, these are all OK > in their context, but when you look into all testpmd command it turns into mess. > > What do you think for: > port representor add > port representor del Seems good to me - did notice some of the interactive help screens were a bit on the long side..