From: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>,
"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
"Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
"Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/i40e: enable VF untag drop
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 18:16:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C224D34EF2@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611530666DF@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Hi Ferruh, Qi,
<snip>
> > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/i40e: enable VF untag drop
> > >>
> > >> On 3/3/2017 1:59 AM, Qi Zhang wrote:
> > >>> Add a new private API to support the untag drop enable/disable for
> > >>> specific VF.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 49
> > >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>> drivers/net/i40e/rte_pmd_i40e.h | 18 +++++++++++++++
> > >>
> > >> Shared library is giving build error because of API is missing in
> > >> *version.map file
> > >>
> > >>> 2 files changed, 67 insertions(+)
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> <...>
> > >>
> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/rte_pmd_i40e.h
> > >>> b/drivers/net/i40e/rte_pmd_i40e.h index a0ad88c..895e2cc 100644
> > >>> --- a/drivers/net/i40e/rte_pmd_i40e.h
> > >>> +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/rte_pmd_i40e.h
> > >>> @@ -332,4 +332,22 @@ int rte_pmd_i40e_get_vf_stats(uint8_t port,
> > >>> int rte_pmd_i40e_reset_vf_stats(uint8_t port,
> > >>> uint16_t vf_id);
> > >>>
> > >>> +/**
> > >>> + * Enable/Disable VF untag drop
> > >>> + *
> > >>> + * @param port
> > >>> + * The port identifier of the Ethernet device.
> > >>> + * @param vf_id
> > >>> + * VF on witch to enable/disable
> > >>> + * @param on
> > >>> + * Enable or Disable
> > >>> + * @retura
> > >>
> > >> @return
> > >>
> > >>> + * - (0) if successful.
> > >>> + * -(-ENODEVE) if *port* invalid
> > >>> + * -(-EINVAL) if bad parameter.
> > >>> + */
> > >>> +int rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_untag_drop(uint8_t port,
> > >>> + uint16_t vf_id,
> > >>> + uint8_t on);
> > >>
> > >> As discussed previously, I believe it is good to keep following
> > >> syntax in
> > API:
> > >> <name_space>_<object>_<action>, for this API it becomes:
> > > I think, current naming rule is <name_space>_<action>_<object> right?
This seems to be the existing naming convention.
> >
> > Overall, I am not aware of any defined naming rule, I am for defining one.
> >
> > > See below
> > > rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_anti_spoof;
> > > rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_filter;
> > > rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_insert;
> > > rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_stripq;
> > > rte_pmd_i40e_set_vf_vlan_tag; so what's wrong with this
> >
> > This breaks hierarchical approach, if you think API name as tree.
> > Easier to see this when you sort the APIs, ns_set_x, ns_reset_x,
> > ns_del_x will spread to different locations.
> I agree with your point, I had thought your concern is only about this patch,
> but actually it's not.
> >
> > This looks OK when you work on one type of object already, but with
> > all APIs in concern, I believe object based grouping is better than
> > action based grouping.
>
> >
> > And why do you think above one is better? Again, as long as one is
> > agreed on,
> I don't, sorry for make you misunderstand
I don't think changing the name convention at this point is a good idea.
It would be better to remain consistent with the existing naming convention.
Otherwise both naming conventions will exist for the rte_pmd_i40e_* API's.
> > >> rte_pmd_i40e_vf_vlan_untag_drop_set(), and perhaps "set" can be
> > removed?
> > >>
> > >>> +
> > >>> #endif /* _PMD_I40E_H_ */
> > >>>
> > >
Regards,
Bernard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-14 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-03 1:59 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] " Qi Zhang
2017-03-03 1:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/i40e: " Qi Zhang
2017-03-07 10:51 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-03-09 3:24 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2017-03-14 13:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-03-14 14:32 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2017-03-14 18:16 ` Iremonger, Bernard [this message]
2017-03-23 17:00 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-03-23 17:22 ` Iremonger, Bernard
2017-03-03 1:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] app/testpmd: enable VF untag drop in testpmd Qi Zhang
2017-03-07 11:13 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-03-09 2:59 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2017-03-14 13:32 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-03-14 14:43 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2017-03-13 4:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] net/i40e: enable VF untag drop Qi Zhang
2017-03-13 4:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] " Qi Zhang
2017-03-13 4:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] app/testpmd: enable VF untag drop in testpmd Qi Zhang
2017-03-23 17:01 ` Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C224D34EF2@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=bernard.iremonger@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
--cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).