From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] vhost: add a flag to enable Tx zero copy
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 15:21:14 +0800
Message-ID: <20160908072114.GL23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1471939839-29778-1-git-send-email-yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
 <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E3912C500@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20160906095548.GB23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <8433603.OGYCHmGCI2@xps13>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Xu, Qian Q" <qian.q.xu@intel.com>,
 Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BA19256
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Sep 2016 09:20:46 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8433603.OGYCHmGCI2@xps13>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 06:00:36PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2016-09-06 17:55, Yuanhan Liu:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 09:00:14AM +0000, Xu, Qian Q wrote:
> > > Just curious about the naming: vhost USER TX Zero copy. In fact, it's Vhost RX zero-copy
> > > For virtio, it's Virtio TX zero-copy. So, I wonder why we call it as Vhost TX ZERO-COPY, 
> > > Any comments? 
> > 
> > It's just that "Tx zero copy" looks more nature to me (yes, I took the
> > name from the virtio point of view).
> > 
> > Besides that, naming it to "vhost Rx zero copy" would be a little
> > weird, based on we have functions like "virtio_dev_rx" in the enqueue
> > path while here we just touch dequeue path.
> > 
> > OTOH, I seldome say "vhost-user Tx zero copy"; I normally mention it
> > as "Tx zero copy", without mentioning "vhost-user". For the flag
> > RTE_VHOST_USER_TX_ZERO_COPY, all vhost-user flags start with "RTE_VHOST_USER_"
> > prefix.
> 
> I agree that the naming in vhost code is quite confusing.
> It would be better to define a terminology and stop mixing virtio/vhost
> directions as well as Rx/Tx and enqueue/dequeue.

I think we could/should avoid using Rx/Tx in vhost, but we should keep
the enqueue/dequeue: that's how the two key vhost API named.

> Or at least, it should be documented.

Or, how about renaming it to RTE_VHOST_USER_DEQUEUE_ZERO_COPY, to align
with the function name rte_vhost_dequeue_burst?

	--yliu