Re: [PATCH v3] ethdev: add hint when creating async transfer table

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

06/11/2022 11:02, Andrew Rybchenko:
> On 10/4/22 11:31, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 9/28/22 12:24, Rongwei Liu wrote:
> >> The transfer domain rule is able to match traffic wire/vf
> >> origin and it means two directions' underlayer resource.
> >>
> >> In customer deployments, they usually match only one direction
> >> traffic in single flow table: either from wire or from vf.

Customer deployment is not an argument.

> >> Introduce one new member transfer_mode into rte_flow_template_table_attr
> >> to indicate the flow table direction property: from wire, from vf
> >> or bi-direction(default).

The origin is not a direction.
We should update this sentence.

> >> It helps to save underlayer memory also on insertion rate, and this
> >> new field doesn't expose any matching criteira.

Should be reworded.

> >> By default, the transfer domain is to match bi-direction traffic, and
> >> no behavior changed.

This sentence is confusing, it should be removed.

> >> 1. Match wire origin only
> >>     flow template_table 0 create group 0 priority 0 transfer wire_orig...
> >> 2. Match vf origin only
> >>     flow template_table 0 create group 0 priority 0 transfer vf_orig...

This testpmd example needs to be introduced with a sentence.

> > Since wire_orig and vf_orig are just optional hints and not
> > all PMDs are obliged to handle it, it does not impose any
> > matching criteria.

Yes

> > So, example above are misleading and you
> > need to add pattern items to highlight that corresponding rules
> > are really wire_orig or vf_orig.

This is template table creation, so I don't think there is more to add.
What do you have in mind?

> I'm sorry, but I still don't see how it is addressed in v4.

I think the documentation in v4 is pretty clear.
Do you see something in the doc which is confusing?
The commit message needs rewording though.