Aaron, please see inline.
>-----Original Message----- >From: ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org <ovs-dev-boun...@openvswitch.org> >On Behalf Of Aaron Conole >Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 4:44 PM >To: Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com> >Cc: ovs-dev@openvswitch.org; Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> >Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [ovs-dev, v1] netdev-rte-offloads: Reassign vport netdev >functions. > >Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com> writes: > >>> 21/04/2019 11:11, Ophir Munk: >>>> Thomas - would you like to explain more on the origins of "rte"? >>> >>> Ian explained (below) the origin quite clearly. >>> It has been decided in the early days by Intel. >>> >>>> From: Ian Stokes >>>> > On 4/17/2019 5:34 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: >>>> > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:45:33AM -0400, Aaron Conole wrote: >>>> > >> rte comes from dpdk as an acronym for Run Time Environment. Maybe >>>> > >> even just dropping the 'rte_' portion? >>>> > > >>>> > > *That* is what rte stands for? What a ridiculously generic name. >>>> > > It's like naming a library Operating System. >>> >>> Yes I agree that it's ridiculous :) >> >> The best header is "rte_eal.h". It looks like DPDK tries to abstract from >> itself. >> >>> >>> I already proposed to replace rte_ with dpdk_ prefix >>> but the vast majority was against a big replacement. >>> Would you support such a change? >> >> I'm not contributing much to dpdk these days, but I'd support such a >> change. > >I have a longer (and probably useless, but w/e) opinion below. > >> This would be a big step toward apps that tries to work with DPDK as a >> library >> and not as a run-time environment. >> And, probably, right now is the last chance for DPDK do make such a huge API >break. >> There was way too much discussions about API stability and I'm afraid that >> DPDK >> will petrify soon without ability to change anything. > >+ .5 > >I think it makes sense to do this change at the time DPDK project >declares a stronger ABI&API guarantee. "This is the new ossified >ABI/API, and we don't break it." It's a strong declaration to users. >And API / ABI are really just user interfaces. Compilers, computers, >etc. don't "care". > >Then again, history is littered with crazier ossification in software. >After all, we still use CAR,CDR in lisp and I don't think most people >know what that's all about either. Heck, supposedly indices start at 0 >rather than 1 to correct for yacht handicapping interrupting the >compiler[1][2] and it turns out that isn't a terrible thing. "rte_" >*is* one character less than "dpdk_" after all. > >All this to say, I don't think it really truly matters. As seen in the >original patch, people now just think "rte == dpdk" and so it's probably >a lot of hassle for not as much gain. Anyone who googles "rte_*" upon >encountering it in code will find DPDK. And whatever the reason for >using "rte_" originally won't matter. > >So I guess... do whatever you'd like in your existing code. :) > >OTOH, for code in OvS, I'll continue to advocate against using *rte* >because it's new code and *rte* doesn't really mean anything to OvS >anyway. At least in the DPDK project, it meant something. > >1: >https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipe >dia.org%2Fwiki%2FZero- >based_numbering%23Origin&data=02%7C01%7Croniba%40mellanox.com%7 >C6de746f1250948803ec608d6cca94ccd%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7 >C0%7C0%7C636921424851725523&sdata=IvceIDWnPxohuOl2smsbmf2Pz43tk >8KgnUm5AVXDWfU%3D&reserved=0 >2: >https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fexple.tive.o >rg%2Fblarg%2F2013%2F10%2F22%2Fcitation- >needed%2F&data=02%7C01%7Croniba%40mellanox.com%7C6de746f125094 >8803ec608d6cca94ccd%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636 >921424851725523&sdata=6ZlgjwSktRL8ltjAOUHcDJHksoWH8rKqo%2BenInMJ >6Y8%3D&reserved=0 > Agree that for most developers dpdk == rte, and when looking at the code rte* will not be confusing. Having said that, totally agree that it makes more sense for OVS code to use dpdk and not rte in the API. We have tc-offload and dpdk-offload and we have netdev-dpdk...etc. This patch is not relevant anymore as the required functionality was implemented by Ilya as infrastructure in a different patch, but will follow the convention on future patches. Thanks, Roni >>> >>>> > This piqued my interest also, with DPDK in the early days it was >>>> > targeting >bare >>>> > metal comms systems, so the original API was LWRTE (LiteWeight Run Time >>>> > Environment) which became RTE as it moved on from bare metal, so it >seems >>>> > more of a legacy convention. >>> >_______________________________________________ >dev mailing list >d...@openvswitch.org >https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.open >vswitch.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fovs- >dev&data=02%7C01%7Croniba%40mellanox.com%7C6de746f1250948803ec60 >8d6cca94ccd%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C63692142485 >1735523&sdata=ITEQBetXzMxsyR7wU02rwrpx4epHc4LARdEhEDTXq3M%3D& >amp;reserved=0 _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev