Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] doc: fix nfp multiport syntax

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

On 4/26/2021 10:46 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 4/23/2021 5:18 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 3/1/2021 1:45 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> On 2/25/2021 11:46 AM, Heinrich Kuhn wrote:
>>>> From: "Chaoyong.He" <chaoyong.he@corigine.com>
>>>>
>>>> 1. Fixup the suffix of the PCI ID to be consistent with the code.
>>>> 2. Add specification of using MAC address to identify port.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 979f2bae0 ("doc: improve multiport PF in nfp guide")
>>>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chaoyong.He <chaoyong.he@corigine.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Kuhn <heinrich.kuhn@netronome.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   doc/guides/nics/nfp.rst | 14 +++++++++-----
>>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/nfp.rst b/doc/guides/nics/nfp.rst
>>>> index fef99973b..2b170539d 100644
>>>> --- a/doc/guides/nics/nfp.rst
>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/nfp.rst
>>>> @@ -117,15 +117,19 @@ although once they are created, DPDK apps should be 
>>>> able to use them as normal
>>>>   PCI ports.
>>>>   NFP ports belonging to same PF can be seen inside PMD initialization with a
>>>> -suffix added to the PCI ID: wwww:xx:yy.z_port_n. For example, a PF with PCI ID
>>>> +suffix added to the PCI ID: wwww:xx:yy.z_portn. For example, a PF with PCI ID
>>>>   0000:03:00.0 and four ports is seen by the PMD code as:
>>>>      .. code-block:: console
>>>> -      0000:03:00.0_port_0
>>>> -      0000:03:00.0_port_1
>>>> -      0000:03:00.0_port_2
>>>> -      0000:03:00.0_port_3
>>>> +      0000:03:00.0_port0
>>>> +      0000:03:00.0_port1
>>>> +      0000:03:00.0_port2
>>>> +      0000:03:00.0_port3
>>>> +
>>>
>>> +1 to fix.
>>>
>>>> +Some dpdk applications can choose to use the MAC address to identify ports,
>>>> +OVS-DPDK is one such example, please refer to:
>>>> +https://docs.openvswitch.org/en/latest/howto/dpdk/
>>>
>>> This is not PMD specific information, not sure to have here,
>>> also not sure to have an external link here, basically for the maintenance 
>>> concerns, should we document this usage withing DPDK in a wider than a PMD 
>>> scope?
>>>
>>
>> Ping.
>>
>> Will there be a new version?
>> If not I can just get the fix part (s/port_n/portn).
> 
> Partially, for the fix part,
> Applied to dpdk-next-net/main, thanks.


Hi Thomas, David, Akhil, Jerin, Maxime, Qi, Raslan, Ajit,

For the doc patches, the subsystem prefix 'doc:' is too wide, what do you think 
to extend it to include the component, like for this patch:
"doc/nics/nfp: fix multiport syntax"