Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/6] eal/memory: rename buf physaddr to buf iovaaddr

[Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:15:02PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 20/10/2017 14:31, Santosh Shukla:
> > Rename buf_physaddr to buf_iovaaddr
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
> > ---
> [...]
> > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
> >  	 * same mbuf cacheline0 layout for 32-bit and 64-bit. This makes
> >  	 * working on vector drivers easier.
> >  	 */
> > -	iova_addr_t buf_physaddr __rte_aligned(sizeof(iova_addr_t));
> > +	iova_addr_t buf_iovaaddr __rte_aligned(sizeof(iova_addr_t));
> 
> I really do not understand this naming scheme.
> The "A" of IOVA means Address. So "addr" in iovaaddr is redundant.

+1

ioaddr looks clearer than iovaaddr.
It could also be io_addr or bus_addr.

> 
> It seems that IOVA is a too much famous acronym to avoid it.
> Unfortunately, there is no justification in the commit message.
> For the record, my preference was "IO address".
> 
> We could at least add an underscore in iova_addr.
> 
> But I will apply it as is because nobody else complained.
>