From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Richardson, Bruce" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add an API to query enabled core index Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 23:27:47 +0000 Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA352EF@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1402519509-26653-1-git-send-email-Patrick.Lu@intel.com> <9007853.cgh6aaULN3@xps13> <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01AA35210@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> <1487472.hZgYJQSpCy@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: Thomas Monjalon Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1487472.hZgYJQSpCy@xps13> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2014 3:50 PM > To: Richardson, Bruce > Cc: Lu, Patrick; dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] Add an API to query enabled core index >=20 > 2014-06-11 21:57, Richardson, Bruce: > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > > > 2014-06-11 13:45, Patrick Lu: > > > > The new API rte_lcore_id2() will return an index from enabled lcore= s > > > > starting from zero. > > > > > > I think core_id2 is not a representative name. > > > What do you think of renaming core_id as lcore_hwid and core_id2 as > > > lcore_index? > > > > I like lcore_index as the name for the new function. However, I'm not s= ure > > in that case that we want/need to rename the old one. >=20 > I think it would be not easy to distinguish id and index. So I prefer > hwid/index. And lcore is more precise than core. >=20 The function is already called "rte_lcore_id()" so there is no need to chan= ge it to make it an "lcore" function. That function has been around for a l= ong time and is commonly used, so I'd prefer it not be changed unless it re= ally is necessary. "rte_lcore_index" is a sufficiently different function n= ame, in my opinion. The API documentation should clear up any confusion for= the user anyway.