[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <39e24b30-5ef9-7f16-d02f-be81c4745327@amd.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 09:52:20 -0800
From: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@....com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, danielj@...dia.com,
yishaih@...dia.com, jiri@...dia.com, saeedm@...dia.com,
parav@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V3 7/8] devlink: Expose port function commands to
control migratable
On 12/6/22 12:55 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 12:37:44AM CET, shnelson@....com wrote:
>> On 12/4/22 6:16 AM, Shay Drory wrote:
>>> Expose port function commands to enable / disable migratable
>>> capability, this is used to set the port function as migratable.
>>
>> Since most or the devlink attributes, parameters, etc are named as nouns or
>> verbs (e.g. roce, running, rate, err_count, enable_sriov, etc), seeing this
>> term in an adjective form is a bit jarring. This may seem like a picky
>> thing, but can we use "migrate" or "migration" throughout this patch rather
>> than "migratable"?
>
> But it is about "ability to migrate". That from how I understand the
> language, "migratable" describes the best, doesn't it?
Yes, 'migratable' describes it, but as I said, the adjective form seems
a bit jarring to read among the many noun and verb forms found in most
of the rest of the IDs and ATTRs.
Now, after having some coffee this morning and looking through more of
the lists, I see there are already a couple like this -
DEVLINK_TRAP_GENERIC_ID_NON_ROUTABLE and DEVLINK_ATTR_PORT_SPLITTABLE.
Fine, carry on.
sln
Powered by blists - more mailing lists