Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/9] ethdev: introduce representor type
From: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
Date: 2021-01-18 18:18:17
From: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
Date: 2021-01-18 18:18:17
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:15 AM Thomas Monjalon [off-list ref] wrote:
18/01/2021 19:00, Ajit Khaparde:quoted
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:57 AM Thomas Monjalon [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
18/01/2021 18:42, Ajit Khaparde:quoted
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 3:17 AM Xueming Li [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
+enum rte_eth_representor_type { + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_NONE, /**< not a representor. */ + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_VF, /**< representor of VF. */ + RTE_ETH_REPRESENTOR_SF, /**< representor of SF. */Till we get used to the terminology... Can we also have SF = "Sub Function" mentioned in the docs or comments?Are we sure about the definition? I remember seeing SF = Scalable Function somewhere else (maybe from Intel)That complicates it. But if they mean the same thing, let's pick one.I think "Sub Function" and "Virtual Function" are easy to understand for everybody. I suggest picking these two for comments above.
+1