From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 201ABA0487 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:55:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDD342C23; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:55:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B31D82BB5 for ; Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:55:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id a15so14961925wmj.5 for ; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 01:55:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=BbL7et832vJDpDoq+oEVnUvk2RmQuL3OJ6rnF+MIAPY=; b=Vux8+Ttm6YHL+0mArEx7y9v9DgEn1s5VhIEayLQDIgqy9xibd4WLZFpq36Yx7nBDN2 ttsaP/XIZumDQskzNd1t5SCDVHAxZYY8JgMQmTzn+LukasQy4SmJ8ffOOuTLB10mC3lL fscp7jLLqP1ReaKfzAfe4nF8uEB5BSNUSAwkzl9nXEdb+0BcO3Bw2LQPudGERieOqLgQ G41hyq8osgW26/KYQmzsN+gNZ6ITUi+Br/C3BkKCv8kMiDQqaM6WW2y1ItceoVCnnKlJ McA3Als5XOfbycKtcf6oviKaqIfiZTQAjg4GcRDRxD9krKfFsXSNmKic/h/Ph4THWG2f RASg== 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:in-reply-to; bh=BbL7et832vJDpDoq+oEVnUvk2RmQuL3OJ6rnF+MIAPY=; b=EWjKeqEYBtiQnVVwCA3KAgk4ixBaVkjV+j/2hA1SoEOYItRDRF+eQA3wI6hmRFVgVU lhElbBq07kmJf9rxqCxv9fjoPt3HG0R4a+FlRwXo1903WiLASwVcpwaTpOJfDwfz2k87 qUd2vCwjvm2PbQiUra0RHtgzVf0+f3Yc2RyIjHL0bLpeV7VARwz37p2xtDsE6yEIJb11 lkA2ti0x/I6CsjgKyZDWH3oWU8tymahj/94aN2Qv1NKE8KX/8VnFTI2KLBlUbQrkFcmE GtkH3BN4hiLM8r8pncTRj364wMpkWJXuhwe/eQSRpuxRvic5sOUDgTA1bnB8G2G7zUCR FO2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUbz/0w/sd/0U/WySvyq7mk8eU/fuDCxwoEGIo0Sppcszbot9FP A/kaLSGVS2n4wUGp9GNQj6ImsA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx7Vr/xbRjNkM+NiC0EorlZEKBHPpfD992XdqmMdXVn1g67P7PQ8IL4/LDWDtEmeos7fVbKOw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:df46:: with SMTP id w67mr15739576wmg.69.1561971305274; Mon, 01 Jul 2019 01:55:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b8sm6437300wmh.46.2019.07.01.01.55.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Jul 2019 01:55:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 10:55:02 +0200 From: Adrien Mazarguil To: Dekel Peled Cc: wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, jingjing.wu@intel.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com, yskoh@mellanox.com, shahafs@mellanox.com, viacheslavo@mellanox.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com, dev@dpdk.org, orika@mellanox.com Message-ID: <20190701085502.GD3911@6wind.com> References: <8b43b7e77d467429b45cb86eb09e218d721dd0de.1561872899.git.dekelp@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8b43b7e77d467429b45cb86eb09e218d721dd0de.1561872899.git.dekelp@mellanox.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/3] ethdev: add actions to modify TCP header fields 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 10:59:08AM +0300, Dekel Peled wrote: > Add actions: > - INC_TCP_SEQ - Increase sequence number in the outermost TCP header. > - DEC_TCP_SEQ - Decrease sequence number in the outermost TCP header. > - INC_TCP_ACK - Increase acknowledgment number in the outermost TCP > header. > - DEC_TCP_ACK - Decrease acknowledgment number in the outermost TCP > header. > > Original work by Xiaoyu Min. > > This patch introduces a new approach, using a simple integer instead > of using an action-specific structure for each of these actions. > This approach can be later applied to modify existing actions which > require only a single integer. > > Signed-off-by: Dekel Peled > Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko You didn't take Andrew's comment [1] into account, this patch must be split. I'll highlight what needs to be moved to a pre-patch below. [1] https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-June/136101.html [...] > diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst b/doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst > index a34d012..783a904 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst > @@ -1214,7 +1214,8 @@ Actions > ~~~~~~~ > > Each possible action is represented by a type. Some have associated > -configuration structures. Several actions combined in a list can be assigned > +configuration structures, some others use a simple integer. > +Several actions combined in a list can be assigned > to a flow rule and are performed in order. ^^^^ This must be moved to a separate patch ^^^^ BTW, how about "configuration structure" -> "configuration object" encompassing all kinds of objects once and for all instead? Such a generic term will be handy when actions start using floats or function pointers. [...] > /** > @@ -2140,7 +2172,7 @@ struct rte_flow_action_set_mac { > */ > struct rte_flow_action { > enum rte_flow_action_type type; /**< Action type. */ > - const void *conf; /**< Pointer to action configuration structure. */ > + const void *conf; /**< Pointer to action configuration. */ > }; ^^^^ This must be moved to a separate patch ^^^^ Same comment regarding "configuration object". -- Adrien Mazarguil 6WIND