On Wed, Mar 01 2023, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 06:22:07PM +0100, Halil Pasic wrote: >> On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 09:45:31 +0100 >> Cornelia Huck <coh...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> > For the vq index/number, I'm not that sure that "virtqueue number" is >> > better that "virtqueue index" -- actually, I'd prefer the latter. We'd >> > need some renaming either way. >> >> I prefer index as well. Especially that we start indexing with 0. Also >> seems to be the more common term for such stuff in both Mathematics and >> CS. >> >> Regards, >> Halil > > > Basically I am saying that this: > > /* Queue size for the currently selected queue - Write Only */ > #define VIRTIO_MMIO_QUEUE_NUM 0x038 > > is a bad name because queue number seems to be ambiguous. > > Maybe start with just getting rid of uses of QUEUE_NUM meaning size? Nod, that seems to be uncontroversial. > > > If we want to use queue index we need to fix RSS spec in networking > since that seems to want to use queue index in a very weird way: > networking has this idea of calling queues like this: > receiveq1 receiveq2 .... > why 1-based? I guess we wanted this to be clear even to a 5 year olds ;) > > And then for extra fun, in the RSS section we say "0 based index" where we > seem to mean "this number in the queue name, but subtract 1 in your head". > Why subtract 1? I guess we wanted these 5 year olds to practice math ... Heh :) Yeah, that looks like a mess... I don't think we should use a weird substraction scheme. I haven't looked at the RSS stuff much, would it be hard to fix it up? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
