> -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zhihong Wang > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 4:55 AM > To: dev at dpdk.org > Cc: Wang, Zhihong <zhihong.wang at intel.com> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: virtio pmd versions > > This patch explains all the versions of current virtio pmd implementation, > what's the difference, and how to choose the right version.
Hi, Thanks for the clarification docs. That should hopefully answer a frequently asked question. Some minor comments below. > + > +Virtio PMD Versions > +------------------- > + > +Virtio driver has 3 versions of rx functions and 2 versions of tx > functions. In some places RX/TX is used and in some rx/tx. I would suggest the uppercase versions throughout. > + > +RX functions: > + > +* ``virtio_recv_pkts``: > + > + Regular version without mergeable rx buffers support Since these could be a numbered list I would suggest using "#." (numbered list) instead of "*" (bullet list). Also it would be better without a blank line between the name and the definition so that they appear on the same line in the generated docs. > + > + Simple version without mergeable rx buffers support, also fixes the > + avail ring and uses vector instructions to optimize performance s/avail/available in 2 places. Also should that be "available ring size" or "number of available rings" or something else? > +Example to use the simple version of virtio poll mode driver in testpmd: > + > +.. code-block:: console > + > +./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -c 0x7 -n 4 > + -- -i --txqflags=0xf01 --rxq=1 --txq=1 --nb-cores=1 The code/commandline needs to be indented 3-4 spaces to be rendered correctly. I'd also suggest omitting "./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/" and just using "testpmd" since that commandline is target dependent. The command would also fit on one line like that. Thanks, John. --
