On 5/6/2020 2:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 06/05/2020 14:59, Ferruh Yigit: >> On 5/6/2020 1:22 PM, Asaf Penso wrote: >>> There is no way to report back a link speed of 200Gbps. >>> >>> Adding 200G link speed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Asaf Penso <as...@mellanox.com> >>> --- >>> v2 - reword commit log and remove 400G >>> >>> v3 - rebase and fix checkpatch warning >>> --- >>> app/test-pmd/cmdline.c | 12 +++++++----- >>> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_05.rst | 2 ++ >>> doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst | 2 +- >>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++- >>> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 2 ++ >>> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 2 ++ >>> 6 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> Hi Asaf, >> >> Patch looks good, but it updates ethdev & testpmd to have 200G defines and >> mlx5 >> to use it, so net/mlx5 prefix not really fits to the patch, can you separate >> mlx5 changes into another patch? > > I think I was the one advising to squash all. > The reason is that the changes in testpmd and ethdev are > simple and mechanical. > The real change is in mlx5 in my opinion, but I'm fine with splitting as well. >
Agree the real change is in the PMD and rest is mechanical, my concern was if we need to refer the ethdev or testpmd change later, we will need to use commit "net/mlx5: ..." which may be confusing. I think ethdev, testpmd & doc can be combined into one "ethdev: ..." and PMD implementation into other patch. Does it make sense?
