[dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: introduce action context APIs

[Thomas Monjalon]

06/04/2021 13:02, Bing Zhao:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
> > 06/04/2021 11:07, Bing Zhao:
> > > From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko at oktetlabs.ru>
> > > > On 3/17/21 11:28 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > > 17/03/2021 08:59, Bing Zhao:
> > > > >> The new functions rte_flow_action_ctx* that were added will
> > > > replace
> > > > >> the curret shared functions rte_flow_shared_action_*.
> > > > >>   - rte_flow_shared_action_create
> > > > >>   - rte_flow_shared_action_destroy
> > > > >>   - rte_flow_shared_action_update
> > > > >>   - rte_flow_shared_action_query
> > > > >>   + rte_flow_action_ctx_create
> > > > >>   + rte_flow_action_ctx_destroy
> > > > >>   + rte_flow_action_ctx_update
> > > > >>   + rte_flow_action_ctx_query
> > > > >>
> > > > >> When creating a action context, it could be shared among
> > > > different
> > > > >> flows or different ports. Or it could also be used by a
> > single
> > > > flow.
> > > > >> The name "shared" is improper in a sense.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it the only reason for the change?
> > > > > I better understand "shared" even if it is sometimes not
> > shared.
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > >
> > > In another email, I explained the change a bit more. Please check
> > and give comments, thank you all.
> > 
> > Any link to this email from inbox.dpdk.org?
> 
> The link is here.
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/MN2PR12MB29097FE55676D5D389D86C46D0769@MN2PR12MB2909.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
> 
> > 
> > Please explain here the naming reason.
> > 
> 
> The naming reasons are listed below:
> 1. The "shared_action*" is incorrect or improper naming of the interface.
> 2. The "_update" interface needs to be changed to support the partial updating capability.
> 3. Since we need to modify the update interface, this is a chance to change the improper *experimental* interfaces naming to make them more proper.

It does not explain why "action_ctx" is a better name than "shared_action".