From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Marchand Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] ixgbe: fix rx intr compatible issue with PF mbox Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:06:20 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1443072831-19065-1-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com> <1443072831-19065-7-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AB85D6@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AB862D@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AB8655@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f170.google.com (mail-ob0-f170.google.com [209.85.214.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3241595A for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2015 18:06:20 +0100 (CET) Received: by obctp1 with SMTP id tp1so99065341obc.2 for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:06:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AB8655@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> 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" On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin < konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote: > > If you don't want rx/tx, don't poll the port. > > Well, the question is why to add an extra restriction here? > Well, until I start a port, I would expect it to do nothing. Probably user deliberately doesn't want to call dev_start() for PF device - > as he doesn't plan to use it for RX/TX. > Or might be dev_stop() was called just to do some re-configuration > (allow to TX scattered packets on the PF queues or so). > Or dev_start() for PF has not yet been called. > Why VF should stop working properly because of that? > Why not. -- David Marchand