[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/mlx5: add 200G link speed

[Thomas Monjalon]

06/05/2020 16:01, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 5/6/2020 2:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 06/05/2020 14:59, Ferruh Yigit:
> >> On 5/6/2020 1:22 PM, Asaf Penso wrote:
> >>> There is no way to report back a link speed of 200Gbps.
> >>>
> >>> Adding 200G link speed.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Asaf Penso <asafp at mellanox.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2 - reword commit log and remove 400G
> >>>
> >>> v3 - rebase and fix checkpatch warning
> >>> ---
> >>>  app/test-pmd/cmdline.c                      | 12 +++++++-----
> >>>  doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_05.rst      |  2 ++
> >>>  doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst |  2 +-
> >>>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c              | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>  lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c              |  2 ++
> >>>  lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h              |  2 ++
> >>>  6 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> Hi Asaf,
> >>
> >> Patch looks good, but it updates ethdev & testpmd to have 200G defines and mlx5
> >> to use it, so net/mlx5 prefix not really fits to the patch, can you separate
> >> mlx5 changes into another patch?
> > 
> > I think I was the one advising to squash all.
> > The reason is that the changes in testpmd and ethdev are
> > simple and mechanical.
> > The real change is in mlx5 in my opinion, but I'm fine with splitting as well.
> > 
> 
> Agree the real change is in the PMD and rest is mechanical, my concern was if we
> need to refer the ethdev or testpmd change later, we will need to use commit
> "net/mlx5: ..." which may be confusing.
> 
> I think ethdev, testpmd & doc can be combined into one "ethdev: ..." and PMD
> implementation into other patch.
> 
> Does it make sense?

Yes I understand your concern about future reference.
I am OK with what you propose:
	1/ ethdev: add 200G link speed
	2/ net/mlx5: support 200G link speed