From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BED2C55
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 17 May 2017 18:03:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38])
 by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
 17 May 2017 09:02:52 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,355,1491289200"; d="scan'208";a="88423509"
Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.81])
 ([10.237.220.81])
 by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 May 2017 09:02:51 -0700
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
 "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
 "Tahhan, Maryam" <maryam.tahhan@intel.com>
References: <20170420185448.19162-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
 <20170420185448.19162-2-ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAF774A@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Message-ID: <64f62140-86d9-22e8-6605-487da657a4f4@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 17:02:50 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAF774A@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 17.08] flow_classify: add librte_flow_classify
 library
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 16:03:05 -0000

On 5/17/2017 3:54 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
> Please see my comments/questions below.

Thanks for review.

> Thanks
> Konstantin

<...>

> I think it was discussed already, but I still wonder why rte_flow_item can't be used for that approach?

Missed this one:

Gaëtan also had same comment, copy-paste from other mail related to my
concerns using rte_flow:

"
rte_flow is to create flow rules in PMD level, but what this library
aims to collect flow information, independent from if underlying PMD
implemented rte_flow or not.

So issues with using rte_flow for this use case:
1- It may not be implemented for all PMDs (including virtual ones).
2- It may conflict with other rte_flow rules created by user.
3- It may not gather all information required. (I mean some actions
here, count like ones are easy but rte_flow may not be so flexible to
extract different metrics from flows)
"