From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45FDE108F for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:28:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Jan 2017 01:28:01 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,243,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="54800325" Received: from kmsmsx153.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.73.88]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Jan 2017 01:28:00 -0800 Received: from pgsmsx103.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.52]) by KMSMSX153.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.73.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 17:27:59 +0800 From: "Zhao1, Wei" To: "Yigit, Ferruh" , Adrien Mazarguil CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 14/18] net/ixgbe: parse L2 tunnel filter Thread-Index: AQHSbXWYil2oAEzHM0iCDkIDa0hVG6E6kOwAgAA8KQCAAZwOAA== Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 09:27:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1484212665-1635-1-git-send-email-wei.zhao1@intel.com> <1484295192-34009-1-git-send-email-wei.zhao1@intel.com> <1484295192-34009-15-git-send-email-wei.zhao1@intel.com> <20170116130348.GA3779@6wind.com> <84768b60-d645-eb0b-37e4-4482cde4c68e@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <84768b60-d645-eb0b-37e4-4482cde4c68e@intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.30.20.206] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 14/18] net/ixgbe: parse L2 tunnel filter 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 09:28:03 -0000 Hi, Ferruh > -----Original Message----- > From: Yigit, Ferruh > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:39 AM > To: Adrien Mazarguil ; Zhao1, Wei > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Lu, Wenzhuo > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 14/18] net/ixgbe: parse L2 tunnel filte= r >=20 > On 1/16/2017 1:03 PM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 04:13:08PM +0800, Wei Zhao wrote: > >> check if the rule is a L2 tunnel rule, and get the L2 tunnel info. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao > >> Signed-off-by: Wenzhuo Lu > >> --- > >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c | 3 +- > >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c | 216 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h | 48 +++++++++ > >> 3 files changed, 266 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > [...] > >> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > >> b/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h index 98084ac..7142479 100644 > >> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > >> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > >> @@ -268,6 +268,20 @@ enum rte_flow_item_type { > >> * See struct rte_flow_item_vxlan. > >> */ > >> RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_VXLAN, > >> + > >> + /** > >> + * Matches a E_TAG header. > >> + * > >> + * See struct rte_flow_item_e_tag. > >> + */ > >> + RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_E_TAG, > >> + > >> + /** > >> + * Matches a NVGRE header. > >> + * > >> + * See struct rte_flow_item_nvgre. > >> + */ > >> + RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_NVGRE, > >> }; > >> > >> /** > >> @@ -454,6 +468,40 @@ struct rte_flow_item_vxlan { }; > >> > >> /** > >> + * RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_E_TAG. > >> + * > >> + * Matches a E-tag header. > >> + */ > >> +struct rte_flow_item_e_tag { > >> + uint16_t tpid; /**< Tag protocol identifier (0x893F). */ > >> + /** E-Tag control information (E-TCI). */ > >> + /**< E-PCP (3b), E-DEI (1b), ingress E-CID base (12b). */ > >> + uint16_t epcp_edei_in_ecid_b; > >> + /**< Reserved (2b), GRP (2b), E-CID base (12b). */ > >> + uint16_t rsvd_grp_ecid_b; > >> + uint8_t in_ecid_e; /**< Ingress E-CID ext. */ > >> + uint8_t ecid_e; /**< E-CID ext. */ > >> +}; > >> + > >> +/** > >> + * RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_NVGRE. > >> + * > >> + * Matches a NVGRE header. > >> + */ > >> +struct rte_flow_item_nvgre { > >> + /** > >> + * Checksum (1b), undefined (1b), key bit (1b), sequence number = (1b), > >> + * reserved 0 (9b), version (3b). > >> + * > >> + * \c_k_s_rsvd0_ver must have value 0x2000 according to RFC 7637= . > >> + */ > >> + uint16_t c_k_s_rsvd0_ver; > >> + uint16_t protocol; /**< Protocol type (0x6558). */ > >> + uint8_t tni[3]; /**< Virtual subnet ID. */ > >> + uint8_t flow_id; /**< Flow ID. */ > >> +}; > >> + > >> +/** > >> * Matching pattern item definition. > >> * > >> * A pattern is formed by stacking items starting from the lowest > >> protocol > >> -- > >> 2.5.5 > >> > > > > OK for these definitions, however API documentation > > (doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst) must be kept up to date, and it > > would be great if testpmd support for these new items was added > > simultaneously (changes in app/test-pmd/cmdline.c, > > app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c and > doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst). > > > > How about putting all rte_flow changes (API & testpmd) in their own > > separate patch? >=20 > I thought it can be more useful to have library and its user updated in s= ame > patch, gives more context. But missed rte_flow documentation ... >=20 > > > > You could use VLAN PCP/DEI/VID definitions as an example to expose > > partial bit-fields (e.g. epcp_edei_in_ecid_b) in testpmd, see: > > > > 1419fd5a6c9f ("app/testpmd: add protocol fields to flow command") > > > > Now if re-spinning this series yet again is too much work, you can go > > ahead with this commit as long as you do not forget to submit the rest > > later, thanks. > > >=20 > Is following todo list complete: > 1- update rte_flow document, doc/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst, > document two new item types: E_TAG & NVGRE. >=20 > 2- Add testpmd sample implementation and documentation. >=20 I am sorry for miss rte_flow.rst document update, I DON'T know there is suc= h a new file of rte_flow.rst. And also these two types of E_TAG & NVGRE are added into code after rte_flo= w patch, So testpmd implementation do not support for these type. Now, we have been work on task of 17.05.=20 How about finish (1) first as one patch, then after busy work of 17.05 to = add (2) as another patch? OR, if these two work merge in to patch set, I will may be begin to do af= ter the 17.05 task finish? Which one is OK for you? Thank you. >=20 > Hi Wei, >=20 > Would you mind working on a patch to cover above items? >=20 > Thanks, > ferruh