From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 375044CC0 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:14:34 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2018 03:14:33 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,339,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="27578515" Received: from rhorton-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [163.33.230.232]) ([163.33.230.232]) by orsmga006.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Mar 2018 03:14:31 -0700 To: Ferruh Yigit , Shreyansh Jain References: <20180307120851.5822-2-remy.horton@intel.com> <023fbd6c-7cac-6c8b-9a40-7a62e5d47bb7@intel.com> <30b8575d-4aeb-912d-6f74-c49ad7ce879a@intel.com> <591e1a23-8d27-0c59-fd39-0bde9e48e96f@intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772589E28FD57@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2b3a2579-6bce-55f5-6e03-0974729cc95b@intel.com> <20180314213658.GA108@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <20180315143924.GA9172@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> <97dc9f9d-041b-ef99-2ca6-1f557c4f6039@intel.com> <297728c5-0a02-d13a-8c5d-c556258c55a5@intel.com> <5eb4a1e9-9a90-e078-29e3-f61286b1b673@intel.com> Cc: Bruce Richardson , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Wu, Jingjing" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Xing, Beilei" , Thomas Monjalon From: Remy Horton Organization: Intel Shannon Limited Message-ID: <1502c896-5628-477f-ff1e-d1f6ff0263f4@intel.com> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 10:14:30 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5eb4a1e9-9a90-e078-29e3-f61286b1b673@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 10:14:35 -0000 On 20/03/2018 15:03, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 3/16/2018 3:36 PM, Remy Horton wrote: [..] >> struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size { >> uint16_t burst; >> uint16_t ring; >> uint16_t nb_queues; >> }; >> struct rte_eth_dev_info { >> /* ... */ >> struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size preferred_rx; >> struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size preferred_tx; >> }; > > Hi Remy, > > There are already two members in "struct rte_eth_dev_info": > "struct rte_eth_rxconf default_rxconf;" > "struct rte_eth_txconf default_txconf;" > > These two are filled by PMDs. I think we can say these are PMD preferred values > for rte_eth_[rt]xconf structs. > > Right now we are extending the preferred values that PMDs can provide. > > So what about using same naming convention to be consistent with existing usage? > Something like "struct rte_eth_portconf default_portconf"? Would default_[rt]xportconf be ok? I would consider adding the parameters to rte_eth_[rt]xconf rather than creating a new rte_eth_portconf but since the former is used elsewhere this might cause complications.