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

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

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).