On 22/09/09 12:46 PM, venugopal iyer wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Darren Reed wrote: > >> venugopal iyer wrote: >>> >>> Thanks, Darren. >>> >>> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Darren Reed wrote: >>> >>>> On 18/09/09 12:29 PM, Kais Belgaied wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> + rxringavailcnt >>>>> >>>>> + A read-only property that specifies the number of rings >>>>> available >>>>> + on the receive side. >>>>> >>>>> + rxringcnt >>>>> >>>>> + Specifies the number of receive rings side for the MAC >>>>> client. >>>>> + A value of 0 means this MAC client should not be assigned >>>>> any RX >>>>> + ring. A non-0 value means reserve that many rings for >>>>> this MAC >>>>> + client, if available, and fail if not. If this property >>>>> is not >>>>> + specified the MAC client may get one RX ring, if >>>>> available, or >>>>> + will be software based. >>>>> + >>>>> + rxhwavailclnt >>>>> + >>>>> + A read-only property that specifies the number of >>>>> additional >>>>> + RX hardware-based MAC clients that can be created. >>>>> + >>>>> + txringavailcnt >>>>> + >>>>> + A read-only property that specifies the number of rings >>>>> available >>>>> + on the transmit side. >>>>> + >>>>> + txringcnt >>>>> + >>>>> + Specifies the number of transmit rings for the MAC client. >>>>> + A value of 0 means this MAC client should not be assigned >>>>> need any >>>>> + TX ring. A non-0 value means reserve that many rings for >>>>> this MAC >>>>> + client, if available, and fail if not. If this property >>>>> is not >>>>> + specified the MAC client may get one TX ring, if >>>>> available, or >>>>> + will be software based. >>>>> + >>>>> + txhwavailclnt >>>>> + >>>>> + A read-only property that specifics the number of >>>>> additional >>>>> + TX hardware-based MAC clients that can be created. >>>>> + >>>>> + >>>>> >>>> >>>> The only comment I have is the naming, specifically the "cnt" and >>>> "clnt" on the end, seems ... I don't know... awkward/cumbersome? >>>> >>>> For example, "rxringavailclnt" and "rxringcnt" both are associated >>>> with mac client but only one mentions "clnt" in its name. >>> >>> I think you mean rxhwavailclnt and rxringcnt, right? >>> If so, then rxhwavailclnt is the number of clients that can be >>> created and we >>> wanted to have the client in the name, I can add cnt to >>> rxhwavailclnt if that >>> makes it any better. >>> >>>> >>>> Additionally, they are all a "count" of something, so "cnt" should >>>> be present on all, right? >>> >>> yes, they are counts. As mentioned above if rxhwavailclntcnt and >>> txhwavailclntcnt makes it better, I am fine with it. >> >> And that is the point, these names look awful :-( >> >> For example, if you look through any of statistics in kstat, you >> generally don't see "cnt" or "count". >> >> >>>> I'd like to suggest thinking of simpler names that do not include >>>> redundant information such as "clnt" and "cnt." >>>> >>>> For example, if "rxringcnt" became "rxrings", is any meaning really >>>> lost? >>> >>> We started off with rxrings, but wanted to make it explicit that it is >>> the number or rx rings and not, say, as ring index. >> >> If it was just "rxring", then perhaps I would agree that maybe it >> might be something else... >> >> But, for example, we have "Inbound Packets", not "Inbound Packet >> Count" in "netstat -i" output. >> >> To me, the label "rxrings" does not imply it could be about anything >> else but rx rings. If it were to be about an index, then it would be >> "rxringindex" or "rxringindexes" - the name becomes more specific. > > So, do you prefer: > > rxrings/txrings
much better. > rxringsavail/txringsavail much better > rxhwavailclnt/txhwavailclnt Is "clnt" required here? Darren
