Hi Bruce and All,

The v16 use following define, and it also include dma skeleton and ut.
   struct rte_dmadev_stats {
 	uint64_t submitted;
 	uint64_t completed;
 	uint64_t errors;
   }

Feedback welcome, thanks.

On 2021/8/19 22:52, Bruce Richardson wrote:

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 05:09:29PM +0800, Chengwen Feng wrote:

quoted

The 'dmadevice' is a generic type of DMA device.

This patch introduce the 'dmadevice' public APIs which expose generic
operations that can enable configuration and I/O with the DMA devices.

Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng <redacted>
Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <redacted>
Acked-by: Morten Brørup <redacted>
Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <redacted>
---

one minor comment for clarification

quoted

+/**
+ * rte_dmadev_stats - running statistics.
+ */
+struct rte_dmadev_stats {
+	uint64_t submitted_count;
+	/**< Count of operations which were submitted to hardware. */
+	uint64_t completed_fail_count;
+	/**< Count of operations which failed to complete. */
+	uint64_t completed_count;
+	/**< Count of operations which successfully complete. */
+};

The name of the last variable and the comment on it seem mismatched. The
name implies that it's all completed ops, i.e. to get successful only you
do "stats.completed_count - stats.completed_fail_count", while the comment
says that it's successful only. Therefore I suggest:

* We rename the last two vars to "completed_fail" and "completed_success"
  for clarity OR
* We redefine "completed_count" to be the full completed count of both
  success and failure.

I have a slight preference for the latter option, but either can work.

/Bruce

PS: We probably don't need "count" on any of these values, based on two
options above suggest structs as:

  struct rte_dmadev_stats {
	uint64_t submitted;
	uint64_t failed;
	uint64_t successful;
  };

OR:

  struct rte_dmadev_stats {
	uint64_t submitted;
	uint64_t completed;
	uint64_t errors;
  }
.