* [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field @ 2022-03-01 11:51 Dariusz Sosnowski 2022-03-03 12:20 ` Ferruh Yigit 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Dariusz Sosnowski @ 2022-03-01 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ori Kam, Xiaoyun Li, Aman Singh, Yuying Zhang; +Cc: dev, Viacheslav Ovsiienko This patch adds implicit registration of metadata dynamic field and flag whenever a modify_field action with META as source and/or destination field is used. Signed-off-by: Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> --- app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c index 4f7a9f17f9..dd38a635b0 100644 --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c @@ -8347,6 +8347,7 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, const struct token *token, { struct rte_flow_action_modify_field *action_modify_field; unsigned int i; + int ret; (void)token; (void)buf; @@ -8362,9 +8363,15 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, const struct token *token, if (!ctx->object) return len; action_modify_field = ctx->object; - if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) + if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) { action_modify_field->dst.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; - else + if (action_modify_field->dst.field == RTE_FLOW_FIELD_META) { + ret = rte_flow_dynf_metadata_register(); + if (ret < 0) + return -1; + } + + } else action_modify_field->src.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; return len; } -- 2.25.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field 2022-03-01 11:51 [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field Dariusz Sosnowski @ 2022-03-03 12:20 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-03-09 11:50 ` Dariusz Sosnowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2022-03-03 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dariusz Sosnowski, Ori Kam, Xiaoyun Li, Aman Singh, Yuying Zhang Cc: dev, Viacheslav Ovsiienko On 3/1/2022 11:51 AM, Dariusz Sosnowski wrote: > This patch adds implicit registration of metadata dynamic field and flag Hi Dariusz, metaday dynamic field is explicitly registered when testpmd command used to enable tx metadata, or rte flow rule created with "set_meta" action. Can you please document more when this implicit enablement is required? And why that case doesn't cover above explicit enable cases? > whenever a modify_field action with META as source and/or destination > field is used. > According below code it is only registered in the DST_TYPE block, not is 'else' (which seems src) leg, is this OK? > Signed-off-by: Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski@nvidia.com> > Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> > --- > app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > index 4f7a9f17f9..dd38a635b0 100644 > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > @@ -8347,6 +8347,7 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, const struct token *token, > { > struct rte_flow_action_modify_field *action_modify_field; > unsigned int i; > + int ret; > > (void)token; > (void)buf; > @@ -8362,9 +8363,15 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, const struct token *token, > if (!ctx->object) > return len; > action_modify_field = ctx->object; > - if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) > + if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) { > action_modify_field->dst.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; > - else > + if (action_modify_field->dst.field == RTE_FLOW_FIELD_META) { > + ret = rte_flow_dynf_metadata_register(); > + if (ret < 0) > + return -1; > + } > + > + } else > action_modify_field->src.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; > return len; > } ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field 2022-03-03 12:20 ` Ferruh Yigit @ 2022-03-09 11:50 ` Dariusz Sosnowski 2022-03-14 20:42 ` Thomas Monjalon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Dariusz Sosnowski @ 2022-03-09 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ferruh Yigit, Ori Kam, Xiaoyun Li, Aman Singh, Yuying Zhang Cc: dev, Slava Ovsiienko Hi Ferruh, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> > Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 13:21 > To: Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam > <orika@nvidia.com>; Xiaoyun Li <xiaoyun.li@intel.com>; Aman Singh > <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>; Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify > field > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > On 3/1/2022 11:51 AM, Dariusz Sosnowski wrote: > > This patch adds implicit registration of metadata dynamic field and > > flag > > Hi Dariusz, > > metaday dynamic field is explicitly registered when testpmd command used > to enable tx metadata, or rte flow rule created with "set_meta" action. > > Can you please document more when this implicit enablement is required? > And why that case doesn't cover above explicit enable cases? Before this patch, when a user inserted a flow rule with MODIFY_FIELD action, which modified packet metadata, the metadata dynamic field was not registered, as opposed to what happened with SET_META action. Goal of this patch is to make the behavior consistent between these two actions. Maybe using "implicit" in the commit message was misleading here. What do you think about rewording the commit message to something like the one below? "This patch adds registration of metadata dynamic field and flag whenever a MODIFY_FIELD action with META as source and/or destination field is used. It makes the behavior consistent with SET_META action, where metadata dynamic field and flag is registered on flow rule creation." > > whenever a modify_field action with META as source and/or destination > > field is used. > > > > According below code it is only registered in the DST_TYPE block, not is 'else' > (which seems src) leg, is this OK? > > > Signed-off-by: Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski@nvidia.com> > > Reviewed-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com> > > --- > > app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 11 +++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > > index 4f7a9f17f9..dd38a635b0 100644 > > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c > > @@ -8347,6 +8347,7 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, > const struct token *token, > > { > > struct rte_flow_action_modify_field *action_modify_field; > > unsigned int i; > > + int ret; > > > > (void)token; > > (void)buf; > > @@ -8362,9 +8363,15 @@ parse_vc_modify_field_id(struct context *ctx, > const struct token *token, > > if (!ctx->object) > > return len; > > action_modify_field = ctx->object; > > - if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) > > + if (ctx->curr == ACTION_MODIFY_FIELD_DST_TYPE_VALUE) { > > action_modify_field->dst.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; > > - else > > + if (action_modify_field->dst.field == RTE_FLOW_FIELD_META) { > > + ret = rte_flow_dynf_metadata_register(); > > + if (ret < 0) > > + return -1; > > + } > > + > > + } else > > action_modify_field->src.field = (enum rte_flow_field_id)i; > > return len; > > } No, I should add registering for source field as well. Best regards, Dariusz Sosnowski ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field 2022-03-09 11:50 ` Dariusz Sosnowski @ 2022-03-14 20:42 ` Thomas Monjalon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2022-03-14 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dariusz Sosnowski Cc: Ferruh Yigit, Ori Kam, Xiaoyun Li, Aman Singh, Yuying Zhang, dev, Slava Ovsiienko 09/03/2022 12:50, Dariusz Sosnowski: > From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> > > On 3/1/2022 11:51 AM, Dariusz Sosnowski wrote: > > > This patch adds implicit registration of metadata dynamic field and > > > flag > > > > Hi Dariusz, > > > > metaday dynamic field is explicitly registered when testpmd command used > > to enable tx metadata, or rte flow rule created with "set_meta" action. > > > > Can you please document more when this implicit enablement is required? > > And why that case doesn't cover above explicit enable cases? > > Before this patch, when a user inserted a flow rule with MODIFY_FIELD action, > which modified packet metadata, the metadata dynamic field was not registered, as opposed to > what happened with SET_META action. Goal of this patch is to make the behavior consistent > between these two actions. I think consistency should be ensured by the PMD. Why not registering the field in the PMD? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-03-14 20:42 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-03-01 11:51 [PATCH] app/testpmd: register metadata dynfield on modify field Dariusz Sosnowski 2022-03-03 12:20 ` Ferruh Yigit 2022-03-09 11:50 ` Dariusz Sosnowski 2022-03-14 20:42 ` Thomas Monjalon
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).