Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 03/14] doc: add guide for ppfe net PMD

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 10/1/2019 12:01 PM, Gagandeep Singh wrote:
> This patch add documentation for ppfe network
> poll mode driver.
> 
> PPFE is a hardware programmable packet
> forwarding engine to provide high performance
> ethernet interfaces.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gagandeep Singh <g.singh@nxp.com>
> Acked-by: Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@nxp.com>
> Acked-by: Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>

<...>

> +Driver compilation and testing
> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> +
> +Follow instructions available in the document
> +:ref:`compiling and testing a PMD for a NIC <pmd_build_and_test>`
> +to launch **testpmd**
> +
> +Additionally, PPFE driver needs `--vdev` as an input with value `eth_pfe`
> +to execute DPDK application. There is an optional parameter `intf` available
> +to specify port ID. PPFE driver supports only two interfaces, so valid values
> +for `intf` are 0 and 1.
> +see the command below:
> +
> + .. code-block:: console
> +
> +    <dpdk app> <EAL args> --vdev="eth_pfe0,intf=0" --vdev="eth_pfe1,intf=1" -- ...

Previously "eth_" was the prefix for the virtual devices, we have renamed it to
"net_" [1], for this new PMD, can you please use 'net_pfe' for consistency?

Also the driver name is 'ppfe', it is under 'net/ppfe' folder, but the device
name is 'pfe'. Is there any specific reason for this?
Would it be better to stick 'pfe' or 'ppfe' everywhere?


[1]
That is why we have alias device names, to keep backward compatibility for "eth_".