02/04/2020 09:20, Gavin Hu: > Hi Thomas, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 5:45 PM > > To: Joyce Kong <joyce.k...@arm.com>; Gavin Hu <gavin...@arm.com> > > Cc: step...@networkplumber.org; david.march...@redhat.com; > > m...@smartsharesystems.com; jer...@marvell.com; > > bruce.richard...@intel.com; ravi1.ku...@amd.com; rm...@marvell.com; > > shsha...@marvell.com; xuanziya...@huawei.com; > > cloud.wangxiao...@huawei.com; zhouguoy...@huawei.com; Honnappa > > Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>; Phil Yang > > <phil.y...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; dev@dpdk.org; nd > > <n...@arm.com> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] lib/eal: implement the family of PMD > > bit operation APIs > > > > 01/04/2020 10:27, Gavin Hu: > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > 09/03/2020 10:54, Joyce Kong: > > > > > Bitwise operation APIs are defined and used in a lot of PMDs, > > > > > which caused a huge code duplication. > > > > > > > > Statistics of the series: 653 insertions(+), 326 deletions(-) > > > > I would not say it is a huge duplication. > > > We did not include all PMDs, just a few for piloting and seeking opinions. > > > It is a huge duplication when counting all the PMDs. > > > > > > > > > To reduce duplication, > > > > > this patch consolidates them into a common API family. > > > > [...] > > > > > +PMD Bitops > > > > > +M: Joyce Kong <joyce.k...@arm.com> > > > > > +F: lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_pmd_bitops.h > > > > > > > > Why is it called PMD bitops and not simply bitops? > > > > > > The scope of these APIs are decreased to PMD use only, for > > libraries/applications, it is recommended to use C11 directly as there are > > complications of more ordering models involved. > > > > OK, but PMD means nothing, except this is where it is used *now*. > > Please describe and name the API with memory ordering words. > Will remove 'PMD' in v8. > The APIs were already named with a '_relaxed' suffix, for example > 'rte_get_bit64_relaxed'. > According to Honnappa, this patch set just address PMD's requirement, and the > current PMDs are not using C11, so only '_relaxed' version is offered. > http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/ve1pr08mb514983c3200859b27f166ebb98...@ve1pr08mb5149.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com/
So why not calling this component "relaxed bitops"?
