>-----Original Message----- >From: Ajit Khaparde <[email protected]> >Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 2:18 AM >To: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> >Cc: Xueming(Steven) Li <[email protected]>; Ferruh Yigit ><[email protected]>; Andrew Rybchenko ><[email protected]>; Olivier Matz <[email protected]>; >dpdk-dev <[email protected]>; Slava Ovsiienko <[email protected]>; Asaf >Penso <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/9] ethdev: introduce representor type > >On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:15 AM Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> >wrote: >> >> 18/01/2021 19:00, Ajit Khaparde: >> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 9:57 AM Thomas Monjalon ><[email protected]> wrote: >> > > 18/01/2021 18:42, Ajit Khaparde: >> > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 3:17 AM Xueming Li <[email protected]> >wrote: >> > > > > +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
There was an internal discussion and the conclusion is to align with kernel driver name. Will update comment in next version, thanks! > >>
