From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ixgbe: fix check for split packets
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:47:10 +0200
Message-ID: <2646761.JxpPTaGeqc@xps13>
References: <1437492307-29754-1-git-send-email-bruce.richardson@intel.com>
 <55AF9875.7010001@linaro.org>
 <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B03457D2BE@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com
 [209.85.212.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 345615949
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:48:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wibud3 with SMTP id ud3so173500127wib.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 06:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B03457D2BE@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
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>

2015-07-22 13:35, Richardson, Bruce:
> From: Zoltan Kiss [mailto:zoltan.kiss@linaro.org]
> > On 22/07/15 10:59, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > The vector PMD always works off a fixed 32 burst size. Any change to
> > > that will lead to many changes in the code, so I don't believe a loop is
> > necessary.
> > 
> > Ok, then I suggest to make a comment around RTE_IXGBE_VPMD_RX_BURST that
> > changing it needs a lot of other changes in the code elsewhere, e.g in
> > this split_flags check.
> > Btw. vPMD was a bit misleading abbreviation for me, it took me a while
> > until I realized 'v' stands for 'vector', not 'virtualization' as in most
> > cases nowadays.
> 
> Good idea. I'll try to submit a patch to add a comment if I get the chance
> - otherwise feel free to do so yourself.

Why not do it in this patch?
Is it not enough related?

> As for the naming, yes, I suppose it can be confusing. :-) We possibly need
> to start calling these pieces of code SSE or AVX rather than just vector,
> since for some we may end up with multiple vector versions.

+1 for SSE/AVX naming