From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09F612C58 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 14:56:45 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Mar 2018 06:56:44 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,340,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="35643762" Received: from fyigit-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.221.63]) ([10.237.221.63]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Mar 2018 06:56:42 -0700 To: Remy Horton , Shreyansh Jain Cc: Bruce Richardson , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Wu, Jingjing" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Xing, Beilei" , Thomas Monjalon 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> <1502c896-5628-477f-ff1e-d1f6ff0263f4@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 13:56:41 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1502c896-5628-477f-ff1e-d1f6ff0263f4@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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 13:56:46 -0000 On 3/21/2018 10:14 AM, Remy Horton wrote: > > 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 > > > Would default_[rt]xportconf be ok? not sure, rxportconf seems long word we can put some "_" perhaps, and "port" seems not used in existing data structures but I can't think of anything to replace it. > > 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. Also they are specific to Rx/Tx queues but the values we are adding are not specific per queue. But what we are adding is more like: "struct rte_eth_txmode" "struct rte_eth_rxmode" Which are documented as "Rx / Tx features of an Ethernet port" but these are not part of dev_info.