> -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yi...@intel.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:14 PM > To: Remy Horton <remy.hor...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; Jingjing Wu > <jingjing...@intel.com>; Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Beilei Xing > <beilei.x...@intel.com>; Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.j...@nxp.com>; > Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD- > tuned Tx/Rx parameters > > On 3/7/2018 12:08 PM, Remy Horton wrote: > > The optimal values of several transmission & reception related > > parameters, such as burst sizes, descriptor ring sizes, and number > > of queues, varies between different network interface devices. This > > patch allows individual PMDs to specify preferred parameter values. > > > > Signed-off-by: Remy Horton <remy.hor...@intel.com> > > --- > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 15 +++++++++++++++ >
[...] > > > + struct rte_eth_dev_pref_queue_info preferred_queue_values; > > Although these are queue related values, not per-queue but per-port, > the > variable name "preferred_queue_values" gives the impression that these > are per > queue. And "rx_burst_size" is not related to queue at all I think. > > What do you think renaming structure and variable name, > "preferred_dev_config" > perhaps? I missed this naming while reading this patch. In the deprecation notice, 'preferred_size' was the name we came up with precisely on this issue of structure having queue length and burst size. What about using that same name? > > > }; > > > > /** > >
