Re: [dpdk-dev] Questions about rte_eth_link_speed_to_str API

["Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>]

Thanks Thomas,
	I am not sure if we need to  print combined slaves speed.
	How about others' opinion ? @all

	BTW, If yes, one possible option may be like that:
+const char *
+rte_eth_link_speed_to_str(uint32_t link_speed)
+{
+	char name[16];
+
+	if (link_speed == ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE)
+		return "None";
+	if (link_speed == ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE)
+		return "Unknown";
+	if (link_speed < ETH_SPEED_NUM_1G) {
+		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "%u Mbps", link_speed);
+	} else {
+		snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "%u Mbps",
+			link_speed / ETH_SPEED_NUM_1G);
+	}
+
+	return name;
+}

But the float value is difficult to handle, like 2.5 Gbps for show. Any 
advices?

在 2021/9/13 18:26, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 13/09/2021 10:45, Min Hu (Connor):
>> Hi all,
>> 	I have questions about rte_eth_link_speed_to_str API.
>> 	The API converts link speed to string for display, But it only
>> supports the following speeds, like that:
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_NONE: return "None";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_10M:  return "10 Mbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_100M: return "100 Mbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_1G:   return "1 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_2_5G: return "2.5 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_5G:   return "5 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_10G:  return "10 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_20G:  return "20 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_25G:  return "25 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_40G:  return "40 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_50G:  return "50 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_56G:  return "56 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_100G: return "100 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_200G: return "200 Gbps";
>> 	case ETH_SPEED_NUM_UNKNOWN: return "Unknown";
>> 	default: return "Invalid";
>>
>> 	In some cases, like bonding, for example, three slaves which
>> 	link speed are 10Gbps, so link speed of bonding port will be
>> 	30Gbps, but it shows "Invalid".
>>
>> 	Is this reasonable？ any comments will be welcome.
> 
> Is it meaningful to print combined slaves speed?
> If yes, we can do better then this fixed switch/case logic,
> it shouldn't be too hard given it is a standard uint32_t value.
> 
> 
> .
>