[RFC 0/8] ioring: network driver

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 14:34:27 +0000
Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at huawei.com> wrote:

> > > From: Konstantin Ananyev [mailto:konstantin.ananyev at huawei.com]
> > >  
> > > > > > This is first draft of new simplified TAP device that uses
> > > > > > the Linux kernel ioring API to provide a read/write ring
> > > > > > with kernel.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is split from tap device because there are so many
> > > > > > unnecessary things in existing tap, and supporting ioring is
> > > > > > better without ifdefs etc. The default name of the tap
> > > > > > device is different that other uses in DPDK but the driver
> > > > > > tries to keep the same relevant devargs as before.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This driver will only provide features that match what kernel
> > > > > > does, so no flow support etc. The next version will add checksum
> > > > > > and multi-segment packets. Some of the doc files may need update
> > > > > > as well.  
> > > > >
> > > > > Makes sense to me, though didn't properly look inside.
> > > > > One thing - probably add  a 'tap' into the name,
> > > > > 'tap_ioiring' or so, otherwise 'ioring' is a bit too generic
> > > > > and might be confusing.  
> > 
> > Konstantin is referring to the name of the driver and the source code file names, "net/ioring" -> "net/tap_ioring".  
> 
> Yep, that what I meant.

My thoughts, are shorter name is better, and avoids confusion. There are already multiple
drivers that create tap devices: tap and virtio_user. 

> >   
> > > >
> > > > There are some userspaces that look for "e*" in name for some setups.  
> > 
> > Stephen is referring to the device name of an instantiated interface, e.g. "eth0".
> > 
> > And yes, assuming devices named "e*" are Ethernet devices is a common hack in Linux applications. I've done it myself. :-)  
> 
> Ok... and why such practice should prevent us to name PMD itself in a way we think is appropriate? 
>  
I am more leaning towards not having a default name at all. The policy should be done by Linux (udev)
not DPDK. If user wants a name they can add it via devargs.