From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Rybchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] app/testpmd: allow detaching a port not closed Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2018 09:26:27 +0300 Message-ID: References: <20180907233929.21950-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20181017015450.15783-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <20181017015450.15783-2-thomas@monjalon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , To: Thomas Monjalon , Return-path: Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [148.163.129.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B0D95B38 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:27:15 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <20181017015450.15783-2-thomas@monjalon.net> Content-Language: en-GB 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 10/17/18 4:54 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > The testpmd application aim is for testing; > so order of operations should not be enforced. > > There was a test to forbid detaching before closing a port. > However, it may interesting to test what happens in such case. > It is possible for a PMD to automatically close the port when detaching. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon I'm afraid it could be a problem which the patch, since port close ensures that the port is not used for traffic forwarding. Right now the check is gone and we can detach port which is used for traffic forwarding on separate data cores. So, almost guaranteed crash.