Hi Thomas,
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
13/08/2025 10:43, sk...@marvell.com:
+ * Ethernet port type
You mean "link port type"
+ */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_NONE 0 /**< Not defined */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_TP 1 /**< Twisted Pair */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_AUI 2 /**< Attachment Unit Interface */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_MII 3 /**< Media Independent Interface */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_FIBRE 4 /**< Fibre */
In general we use the US word "fiber",
but we are not very consistent, so it is not a strong opinion.
To me, "fibre" reads more natural. Not a strong opinion either.
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_BNC 5 /**< BNC */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_DA 6 /**< Direct Attach copper */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SGMII 7 /**< SGMII */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSGMII 8 /**< QSGMII */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_XFI 9 /**< XFI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SFI 10 /**< SFI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_XLAUI 11 /**< XLAUI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_GAUI 12 /**< GAUI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_XAUI 13 /**< XAUI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_GBASE 14 /**< GBASE */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_CAUI 15 /**< CAUI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_LAUI 16 /**< LAUI */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SFP 17 /**< SFP */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SFP_DD 18 /**< SFP_DD */
You should use more full words in comments, at least for DD.
+1
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SFP_PLUS 19 /**< SFP_PLUS */
Please add more spaces to allow a correct alignment.
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_SFP28 20 /**< SFP28 */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSFP 21 /**< QSFP */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSFP_PLUS 22 /**< QSFP_PLUS */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSFP28 23 /**< QSFP28 */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSFP56 24 /**< QSFP56 */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_QSFP_DD 25 /**< QSFP_DD */
+#define RTE_ETH_LINK_TYPE_OTHER 0x1F /**< Other type */
Why the last one is in hexadecimal? and why 1F?
I take it this is just maximum value for 'uint16_t link_type : 5;'.
Is there a logic in the order and numbering for this list?
Why not using an enum?
May be RTE_LEN2MASK() or something?
Thank you.
Thanks
