From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jerin Jacob

On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 3:12 PM fengchengwen [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

Note:
1) This patch hold dmadev <> vchan layer, I think vchan can be very
   conceptually separated from hw-channel.

I would like to keep it as channel instead of virtual channel as it is
implementation-specific.
No strong opinion on this? @Richardson, Bruce  @Morten Brørup  thoughts

Consider using "context" or "ctx" instead. I might help avoid being mistaken as a DMA hardware feature.

No strong opinion, though. Whatever fits nicely in the documentation is a good choice.

A small anecdote: We once had to name an important parameter in our product, and it came down to the choice of two perfectly good names. We chose the shortest name, only because it fit better into the GUI.

quoted

2) I could not under struct dpi_dma_queue_ctx_s, so this patch I

define

quoted

   the rte_dma_slave_port_parameters refer to Kunpeng DMA

implemention.

One more thing:

The DPDK project is aiming to use inclusive code language. (Ref: https://www.dpdk.org/blog/2020/07/22/dpdk-governing-board-update-july-2020/)

Please replace the word "slave" with something politically correct.

-Morten