From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8DB43B61; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:32:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26EC94067E; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:32:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from wfhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com (wfhigh6-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.157]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A682402D1 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:32:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfhigh.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 601AA1800091; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:32:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:32:10 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1708511528; x=1708597928; bh=XW0tw0dlnIUSf2v4idyNefGHg3BsWjo7SGc28VqbetE=; b= wK8XY/7S7/NnkwcRXrRHfCIrUEVHPOLM3PZmeT9BaSLrzCK3x56tiCZpKLuFsXk/ HPlcpWS3ks99VJLhMff9+zVz1Xp2bLLY77tGzMFH1a0l0jYmeNcdCvJzmr9Qzvja 6hgAkUT9VwcNFhPxQydaRAJBpUKIiIQwM6N0AaJAAg6eJm5qFohMwtox7swM0JOZ YHnv2W+nvmfqsuMgZkxxK0MZCay3qB5ehxtEeftkZuppS2UZNhMUJEixGAloL+7c PRWW19Xse8aTREzWfiVWtJrfjo1961t27apN9KhcwkNIgAB1K7DJA5zOhF5476ul vLdCurfxwaG+oaO+w6IiXw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1708511528; x= 1708597928; bh=XW0tw0dlnIUSf2v4idyNefGHg3BsWjo7SGc28VqbetE=; b=H LiimJZCgwnBwA9Upo0lOqJsvm2y75x2IFnuwfjWlJktRrUotAyBGWQi3t8RWo07i r9GhMMrnEMEA7umGtiQLJXDQ5avCZzvXxaDw6j+hUc9YIhPSkJk/ePwi3r/i9KhK uC4YuY39kYcnGxnmGgplfgZZonJF+TS8v5wfsQLhMJHsxwXJ9JGLZtb6CfgvJBYV ZGqADw86jbnuc+KF0WS99ofyc2wFVjXb6Xz7kzC3f4hRZMnJ05lVVC6T3r+qeyGd CcRsy7w/lTHNrtuEC0cHU1axy3SJ3WTu5vTDZ/Kx/mwkk3mOU1ZIvGOKoCRylAkT Pr8cGXnUssAENq4/O6cYQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrfedvgdduiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieek gfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:32:07 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Oleksandr Kolomeiets Cc: Dariusz Sosnowski , Mykola Kostenok , Christian Koue Muf , dev@dpdk.org, "aman.deep.singh@intel.com" , "yuying.zhang@intel.com" , "dev@dpdk.org" , Ori Kam Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] app/testpmd: support updating flow rule actions Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:32:05 +0100 Message-ID: <5040653.cLl3JjQhRp@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20240126132142.2649250-1-okl-plv@napatech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 12/02/2024 09:37, Oleksandr Kolomeiets: > From: Dariusz Sosnowski > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > 01/02/2024 10:59, Oleksandr Kolomeiets: > > > > "flow actions_update" updates a flow rule specified by a rule ID with > > > > > > > > a new action list by making a call to "rte_flow_actions_update()": > > > > flow actions_update {port_id} {rule_id} > > > > > > > > actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end [user_id] > > > > > > > > Creating, updating and destroying a flow rule: > > > > testpmd> flow create 0 group 1 pattern eth / end actions drop / > > > > end > > > > Flow rule #0 created > > > > testpmd> flow actions_update 0 0 actions queue index 1 / end > > > > Flow rule #0 updated with new actions > > > > testpmd> flow destroy 0 rule 0 > > > > Flow rule #0 destroyed > > > > > > Why not a simple "flow update" command name? > > > > +1. This would also make it consistent with async version of this command > > - "flow queue {port_id} update ...". > > Indeed, shortening the command from "flow actions_update" to "flow update" seems more natural. > However, note that the command updates only the actions of a flow rule and leaves all other parameters unchanged. > My concern is that in the future there can be some "flow pattern_update" command, thus making "flow update" command ambiguous. > Also, the name is consistent with the underlying rte_flow_actions_update() function. > With that in mind, please clarify if the name should still be changed. If a function is added for pattern update, we could still implement it with the same command prefix "flow update" and call functions as appropriate. So yes I still think the command should be "flow update".