[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/4] User-space Ethtool

[Wang, Liang-min]

>I agree with having a more complete API, but have some nits to pick.
>Could the API be more abstract to reduce ABI issues in future?

Which API? Are you referring to the APIs over ethdev level, or something else?
More abstract on input/output data structure definition or else? Could you be more specific?

>I know choosing names is hard, but as a Linux developer ethtool has a very specific meaning to me.
>This API encompasses things broader than Linux ethtool and has different semantics therefore
>not sure having something in DPDK with same name is really a good idea.
>
>It would be better to call it something else like netdev_?? Or dpnet_??

Just to clarify the naming suggestion, in this patch, the prefix “ethtool” only appears on example and on this patch description.
Are you suggesting changing the name over example/l2fwd-ethtool or on this patch description, or may be both?