From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] ethdev: add lock to port allocation
	check
Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 00:13:29 +0200
Message-ID: <8877388.Xvcb3uZcyi@xps>
References: <20180509094337.26112-1-thomas@monjalon.net>
 <20180509122116.ljistjpz3dfljdqo@bidouze.vm.6wind.com>
 <20180510133516.6552e936@xeon-e3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72CEB1B787
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 11 May 2018 00:13:32 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20180510133516.6552e936@xeon-e3>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

10/05/2018 22:35, Stephen Hemminger:
> On Wed, 9 May 2018 14:21:17 +0200
> Ga=EBtan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com> wrote:
>=20
> > A suggestion about the naming here.
> > Reading subsequent patches, we can see this function being used during
> > ethdev allocation routines. The _lock_free suffix is a little
> > misleading, as for an instant one can think that there is something
> > being freed about an allocated ethdev lock.
> >=20
> > I would suggest
> >=20
> >   * rte_eth_dev_allocated_nolock
> >     or
> >   * rte_eth_dev_allocated_lockless
> >     (or even rte_eth_lockless_dev_allocated)
> >=20
> > instead.
>=20
> Personally, used to the convention of:
>     rte_eth_dev_find(name)
> and
>     _rte_eth_dev_find(name)
>=20
> The _ implies internal version without lock.

It is a matter of taste.
We have chosen "nolock" in v2, and I think it is explicit.

> Also allocated to me implies a boolean test only.

Yes, the name is a bit strange.
But it is old and out of the scope of this patch.
If we want to change it, it is an API deprecation.