> > Oh yes, I missed it, sorry. > > > >>> One more question: why is useful to add? Some people forget > uppercases? > >> > >> Upper case is desired but not really mandatory. This was a suggestion > >> put forth to me In one of the reviews. > >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__patches.dpdk.org > >> _project_dpdk_patch_20210830135231.2610152-2D1-2Dasekhar- > 40marvell.co > >> m_&d=DwIDaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=pYk-QOhvnkU- > _75y0NKSn535ZotEGI > >> _E69Py3Ppondk&m=tCLT4AyWr6- > VYmqkdbD879kj0uDFhCqF6jjOWfe8Dn4&s=EWthslG > >> Cy_OWH4bqcOEKKkweFTe4yHZ-2O5yqiKp39w&e= > >> > >> I can abandon this change if you feel it is not appropriate to put > >> many device specific acronyms in the top level word list. > > > > No strong opinion, but I think the patch is OK. > > David, Ferruh, opinions? > > > > Yes this is suggested to be sure acronyms are uppercase in the patch title. > > But if an issue can be described in generic concepts, I am for using them to > instead of using device specific acronyms, to make commit logs less cryptic. Agree that certain commit logs could be re-worded and put in more generic terms.
> Like 'NIC' should be used instead of 'NIX'. But NIX and NIC are not exactly interchangeable. NIX refers to a co-processor. NIX in conjunction with other co-processors (NPA, LMT etc.) delivers the functionality of a NIC. > > Similarly we can try to use long version of CQ/SQ/RQ, although we may need > to use them because of limited title length time to time. > > Rest seems device specific abbreviations we may not escape to use them, so > they are OK to me.
