From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com (mail-wm0-f67.google.com [74.125.82.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F2041B80E for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:53:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id x4so23881103wmh.5 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 07:53:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=SpVttt4gJcRyBM+hslCjtFFi+bc/F3iuEYpy06w8IIc=; b=jNZtO+qZ0G60LO3cxyxJqKnDmdCdZa/lqCpgfP17qDIe9YJdgJYGXugXkaCZcgs/b5 2s8HfrGwlfeMmggoC6uv+5sBL0yCoDUFp5Evvz6QkEZ89lWOXi+rtMTLA7TZWDdUdC6Z YmOpzIdf6Z/AtFu+t+A/OwFwnifbILFB82FeMc9M/oY+C4TtJU4rWCIhaZ+2dqCu81al WG9iWhETI8+y5f3kQPzOQ6PY9mw4bM7l0yl/7OBxWVVpX0Lx2Ni278iwXjDjwbjx2wqm oPFkjbyb1iua3G11wJ4EwO5XaH/Grs2UJGSyoRxFITGJuG9ZkxVJJeG/HA495D9Vb1OO WF+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SpVttt4gJcRyBM+hslCjtFFi+bc/F3iuEYpy06w8IIc=; b=bPRJfo8hTEeoPsh/W3l4eFah6l4pri7iebVnSc/EDhN5nN36Dz4WFaIBfcUZ7bH0kF ymYDNxQI1wyJcAAMA3kMImUmIrQY3nLmhdOCMSgy+sr/0tircB/9yqas6UAA4saX7ldO ox3o32PBWwlXQ3Z1P3ZWWpwPUfUKLthe7nP94eOSY0ENVqL4dOnlJE9rhALdJVv27RKP TWeNjGfCxuB4y8PIQBrvmQomSPQQfEPE9FgI3PkVZYleyeHPIx1vSMnmxQSjOl5Ac5fJ ZtbuloxMtVXXU7VYd/KulXFr/sdrN0RCSmpo4dtW3sxU6aOoEiUScG1taaReu+q6YEM2 F9Bw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCtEc/PgFqw+loxbaJS8M81w1Pnysz1cEhJPXF2fJW3UV+mH/Bs iNwzqAhfZpGaHQ5rrZTlAvGF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49vCEGKm6+betPnQs1XAXvpalBBo/o6TUjlw4e8qtNHe8QgK1meWMPUssXOFKGsV5tIZVlSEg== X-Received: by 10.28.107.151 with SMTP id a23mr1891645wmi.14.1523372020979; Tue, 10 Apr 2018 07:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c124sm1873994wmd.36.2018.04.10.07.53.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Apr 2018 07:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:53:57 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro To: Xueming Li Cc: Shahaf Shuler , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180410145357.rei3genob5sdcge5@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <20180410133415.189905-1-xuemingl@mellanox.com> <20180410133415.189905-4-xuemingl@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180410133415.189905-4-xuemingl@mellanox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 03/15] net/mlx5: support L3 vxlan flow X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:53:41 -0000 On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 09:34:03PM +0800, Xueming Li wrote: > This patch add L3 vxlan support, no inner L2 header comparing to > standard vxlan protocol. > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li > --- > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c > index 026952b46..870d05250 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.c > @@ -410,7 +410,9 @@ static const struct mlx5_flow_items mlx5_flow_items[] = { > .dst_sz = sizeof(struct ibv_flow_spec_tunnel), > }, > [RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_VXLAN] = { > - .items = ITEMS(RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_ETH), > + .items = ITEMS(RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_ETH, > + RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_IPV4, > + RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_IPV6), > .actions = valid_actions, > .mask = &(const struct rte_flow_item_vxlan){ > .vni = "\xff\xff\xff", > -- > 2.13.3 As there is a necessity for a v3, can you also upper VXLAN. It also deserves a comment in the code itself, currently this seems a bug as the RFC [1] implies to have an inner Ethernet layer. I suppose there is a use case for such modification but as it not explained it is just a supposition. Thanks, [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7348 -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND