On 9/20/2021 10:19 AM, Ashwin Sekhar Thalakalath Kottilveetil wrote: >>> 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. >
Got it, my bad, I understood they are same. OK to keep it. >> >> 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. >
