On 11 February 2016 at 16:27, N?lio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro at 6wind.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 11:30:59PM +0100, Marc wrote: > > On 2 February 2016 at 03:20, Stephen Hemminger < > stephen at networkplumber.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 17:33:20 +0000 > > > Harish Patil <harish.patil at qlogic.com> wrote: > > > > > > > * Added utility MACROs ETH_SPEED_NUM_XXX with the numeric > > > > values of all supported link speeds, in Mbps. > > > > > > I would prefer that there were no speed value macros. > > > Linux used to have these, but people kept adding new hardware speeds > > > and it soon gets out of date. > > > > > > > I see what you mean, but I am not sure I agree. Link speeds are > generally a > > reduced amount of items (~20). Though it is true it can eventually grow, > > but at small rate. Having numeric constants all over the source seems > less > > readable and less maintainable (e.g. less "grepable"/"sedable") to me. > > > > > > > > > > If you are going to redo it, then just increase speed to 64 bit, and > allow > > > any non-zero value. > > > > > > > Value is now 32 bits, which I think is enough for future rates in mbps. > > Since these constants were there, and before doing something to have to > > revert it, can someone else give his/her opinion on this? > > For non 64bit architecture it is better to keep it on 32 bit but, if this > field is only used on control plane we can afford 64 bit field and avoid > another ABI breakage (in a far future). > > Even if this 32 bit field seems large enough you can already find on > Internet some reports of transmission of petabit/s [1], we can imagine a > NIC which provide this possibility by aggregating a lot of optical links > and DPDK only will see it as single one. > OK, since it is not performance critical I will change it to 64 bit value. > > > If there is consensus, I've no problem on removing it for v8 > Still the question about numeric speed MACROs is open. best marc > > > > Thanks > > marc > > [1] http://optics.org/news/4/1/29 > > -- > N?lio Laranjeiro > 6WIND >
