Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters

[Remy Horton <remy.horton@intel.com>]

On 20/03/2018 15:03, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 3:36 PM, Remy Horton wrote:
[..]

>> struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size {
>> 	uint16_t burst;
>> 	uint16_t ring;
>> 	uint16_t nb_queues;
>> };
>> struct rte_eth_dev_info {
>> 	/* ... */
>> 	struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size preferred_rx;
>> 	struct rte_eth_dev_preferred_size preferred_tx;
>> };
>
> Hi Remy,
>
> There are already two members in "struct rte_eth_dev_info":
> "struct rte_eth_rxconf default_rxconf;"
> "struct rte_eth_txconf default_txconf;"
>
> These two are filled by PMDs. I think we can say these are PMD preferred values
> for rte_eth_[rt]xconf structs.
>
> Right now we are extending the preferred values that PMDs can provide.
>
> So what about using same naming convention to be consistent with existing usage?
> Something like "struct rte_eth_portconf default_portconf"?


Would default_[rt]xportconf be ok?

I would consider adding the parameters to rte_eth_[rt]xconf rather than 
creating a new rte_eth_portconf but since the former is used elsewhere 
this might cause complications.