From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f53.google.com (mail-wm0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47CAF91F1 for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 09:58:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f53.google.com with SMTP id w12so20214227wmf.0 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 00:58:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yta9xmU6fYxPpSxhcEZ6ai5z6Md8ht64By+/PBxLxMo=; b=Rhpb3TSezL/o+2TblyklXIxI09qLZn+7Ow+9DCB5HESubToHIwTrQI9RbaE/25dvTW lC32qTm1gdVmS+We6WbSLsWcoJJUs1qM1Vm4b/pPg1ZaexunPCs67l3nUfnNsL+vX0N5 w02cYJbFB+k9tL7hYamNYMo25wp3mkgq304ZqJ4j1BpIxcJdDfWpkCw+Qei+APe8usgB 4/xNv3SuteYjQAs0XuXANyfwK1YZXrK2wzmqaZvrltuEIIi+AvdZ+fUzwIL+QUMJtX9x Uow755pW8p1pP92H77yoWs+OIFT+HUoKKFO5anKYaPrTGqD5woUOijXn2KTttyAO3CDY HotA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yta9xmU6fYxPpSxhcEZ6ai5z6Md8ht64By+/PBxLxMo=; b=Pxxs21eTlQlCBJQpbwUchkT8GS4V/QdVyDAMUrTqQzPZ+b9iUOv6CDNPR9QXvJ/X6X 4M5QhVcjHDdZRul6jvl4Z0P8b4UNy1kYUgBXJBb5yqQ7fwFBhY9hQ3kPLluwvJRqyyUq bO46D3AyZ9PiEoC9XsQ7CcQGjec/M9I5wEAaap4+lBBxsEprRlcMhkVINVPqOFGWjJmX P7Ft5rNHlenjPmSyBYWawG68DjqNTn86ZYvXtKLORlj2VpbslR4Fj4GdwNbtFnKMynXJ QYso7te0WIOAZVtpJXYVEB/ZZ7b2qkpcQIrleEfb0oo4Xv61d9vLmGUd0G8XVQuKSv1/ sN7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMad6ZnT6m1UwWLQub+ErXQv4bSUbOrrdaNXcTUuXxJS+9hd8GV8BzKnYDnFfsiZM4P X-Received: by 10.28.203.141 with SMTP id b135mr7357047wmg.36.1473321481010; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 00:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q65sm8214173wmd.24.2016.09.08.00.57.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 08 Sep 2016 00:58:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Yuanhan Liu Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Xu, Qian Q" , Maxime Coquelin Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 09:57:59 +0200 Message-ID: <2422340.23e7AzUA4K@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20160908072114.GL23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <1471939839-29778-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> <8433603.OGYCHmGCI2@xps13> <20160908072114.GL23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/6] vhost: add a flag to enable Tx zero copy X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 07:58:01 -0000 2016-09-08 15:21, Yuanhan Liu: > On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 06:00:36PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2016-09-06 17:55, Yuanhan Liu: > > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 09:00:14AM +0000, Xu, Qian Q wrote: > > > > Just curious about the naming: vhost USER TX Zero copy. In fact, it's Vhost RX zero-copy > > > > For virtio, it's Virtio TX zero-copy. So, I wonder why we call it as Vhost TX ZERO-COPY, > > > > Any comments? > > > > > > It's just that "Tx zero copy" looks more nature to me (yes, I took the > > > name from the virtio point of view). > > > > > > Besides that, naming it to "vhost Rx zero copy" would be a little > > > weird, based on we have functions like "virtio_dev_rx" in the enqueue > > > path while here we just touch dequeue path. > > > > > > OTOH, I seldome say "vhost-user Tx zero copy"; I normally mention it > > > as "Tx zero copy", without mentioning "vhost-user". For the flag > > > RTE_VHOST_USER_TX_ZERO_COPY, all vhost-user flags start with "RTE_VHOST_USER_" > > > prefix. > > > > I agree that the naming in vhost code is quite confusing. > > It would be better to define a terminology and stop mixing virtio/vhost > > directions as well as Rx/Tx and enqueue/dequeue. > > I think we could/should avoid using Rx/Tx in vhost, but we should keep > the enqueue/dequeue: that's how the two key vhost API named. > > > Or at least, it should be documented. > > Or, how about renaming it to RTE_VHOST_USER_DEQUEUE_ZERO_COPY, to align > with the function name rte_vhost_dequeue_burst? Seems reasonable, yes.