From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Simon_K=c3=a5gstr=c3=b6m?= <simon.kagstrom@netinsight.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH / RFC ] ethdev: Allow rte_eth_dev_configure
 with zero RX/TX queues
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 08:29:52 +0200
Message-ID: <573EAEE0.4020802@netinsight.net>
References: <20160516113349.7d2a992f@miho>
 <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F0102622D@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <5739A1D4.6010003@netinsight.net>
 <3AEA2BF9852C6F48A459DA490692831F010262FA@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <5739C83F.6010107@netinsight.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: "Pattan, Reshma" <reshma.pattan@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org"
 <dev@dpdk.org>, "thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from ernst.netinsight.se (ernst.netinsight.se [194.16.221.21])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7F0A79AF2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 20 May 2016 08:30:00 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <5739C83F.6010107@netinsight.net>
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>

Ping? Any more comments on this?

// Simon

On 2016-05-16 15:16, Simon K=E5gstr=F6m wrote:
> On 2016-05-16 14:43, Pattan, Reshma wrote:
>>>> This was added to allow devices,  at least with one direction (RX/TX=
)
>>> supported. As, devices with both directions disabled doesn't make  se=
nse right?
>>>
>>> Well, not for running them, no. But this is a part of the shutdown pr=
ocedure
>>> between tests (I should have been more clear I guess).
>>
>> Yes I understood this. But I am not sure if you can use rte_eth_dev_co=
nfigure(port, 0, 0) to free the resources.
>> Can you check if you can use rte_eth_dev_rx_queue_stop/ rte_eth_dev_tx=
_queue_stop to achieve the same, because they do take care of
>> releasing mbufs, but doesn't free the queue's sw-ring and queue.
>=20
> But isn't that very strange behavior. Aren't the descriptor rings
> allocated in rx_queue_setup()? If so, the sequence
>=20
>   rx_queue_stop(); // Release buffers
>   rx_queue_start();
>=20
> would leave the descriptor ring empty after start, i.e., not able to
> receive data.
>=20
> // Simon
>=20