diff mbox

[dpdk-dev] testpmd: Fix wrong message when no port started

Message ID 1422952659-21557-1-git-send-email-michael.qiu@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State Rejected, archived
Headers

Commit Message

Michael Qiu Feb. 3, 2015, 8:37 a.m. UTC 
  The log message is wrong when no port started.

Signed-off-by: Michael Qiu <michael.qiu@intel.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon March 23, 2015, 1:52 p.m. UTC | #1 
Pablo, what is your opinion on this patch?

2015-02-03 16:37, Michael Qiu:
> The log message is wrong when no port started.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Qiu <michael.qiu@intel.com>
> ---
>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> index 773b8af..ebf9448 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> @@ -1423,7 +1423,7 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
>  	if (need_check_link_status && !no_link_check)
>  		check_all_ports_link_status(nb_ports, RTE_PORT_ALL);
>  	else
> -		printf("Please stop the ports first\n");
> +		printf("Please start at least one port first\n");

Why the word "first"?
What could lead to this situation? Wrong pid?
Shouldn't be an error returned?

>  
>  	printf("Done\n");
>  	return 0;
De Lara Guarch, Pablo March 25, 2015, 12:34 p.m. UTC | #2 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 1:53 PM
> To: Qiu, Michael; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] testpmd: Fix wrong message when no port
> started
> 
> Pablo, what is your opinion on this patch?

Sorry for the delay, I missed this email.
> 
> 2015-02-03 16:37, Michael Qiu:
> > The log message is wrong when no port started.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Qiu <michael.qiu@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > index 773b8af..ebf9448 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > @@ -1423,7 +1423,7 @@ start_port(portid_t pid)
> >  	if (need_check_link_status && !no_link_check)
> >  		check_all_ports_link_status(nb_ports, RTE_PORT_ALL);
> >  	else
> > -		printf("Please stop the ports first\n");
> > +		printf("Please start at least one port first\n");
> 
> Why the word "first"?
> What could lead to this situation? Wrong pid?
> Shouldn't be an error returned?

I see no reason why we should change this.
Code has changed since, so now it only goes there if user is trying to start a port that has been already started.
If pid is wrong, it will show "Port invalid".

So, in a summary, NACK.

Thanks,
Pablo
> 
> >
> >  	printf("Done\n");
> >  	return 0;
>
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
index 773b8af..ebf9448 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
@@ -1423,7 +1423,7 @@  start_port(portid_t pid)
 	if (need_check_link_status && !no_link_check)
 		check_all_ports_link_status(nb_ports, RTE_PORT_ALL);
 	else
-		printf("Please stop the ports first\n");
+		printf("Please start at least one port first\n");
 
 	printf("Done\n");
 	return 0;