Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] librte_ether: add RTE_ETH_FDIR_OTHER for flow director behavior

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 03:48:32PM +0100, Chilikin, Andrey wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:38 PM
> > To: Chilikin, Andrey
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] librte_ether: add RTE_ETH_FDIR_OTHER
> > for flow director behavior
> > 
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 03:26:38PM +0100, Andrey Chilikin wrote:
> > > Add new flow director behavior RTE_ETH_FDIR_OTHER to assign a queue by
> > > other filters
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Chilikin <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h |    1 +
> > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h
> > > b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h index 26b7b33..3acf501 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h
> > > @@ -417,6 +417,7 @@ struct rte_eth_fdir_input {  enum
> > > rte_eth_fdir_behavior {
> > >  	RTE_ETH_FDIR_ACCEPT = 0,
> > >  	RTE_ETH_FDIR_REJECT,
> > > +	RTE_ETH_FDIR_OTHER,
> > >  };
> > >
> > >  /**
> > > --
> > > 1.7.4.1
> > >
> > Is "OTHER" meant to be a "NOOP" or a generic hold-all for a set of other
> > possible behaviours. From the description, I would assume NOOP - in which
> > case would RTE_ETH_FDIR_NOOP not be a better name?
> > 
> > /Bruce
> "NOOP" sounds like no operation at all, but FD still performs matching and 
> extracts flexible payload to the RX descriptor, it only skips queue assignment
> which is done by other filters with lower priority. Maybe RTE_ETH_FDIR_PASSTHRU?
> 
> Regards,
> Andrey

PASSTHRU seems good to me. It's clearer than "OTHER" anyway :-)

/Bruce