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 4680245B13; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:34:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BA44028B; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:34:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D69F04025F for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:34:01 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1728657241; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aoScEoYKpF9KMB5nAaa5AItxD3OJFglSEoUUUyPIJtw=; b=Jo2kQdG9jx5Jksm88hnBzy9YGwVovti+ET3psOAr8sg9x31tRF4/Hq3Y4evF/lMIx0MeZV 7sZFTwBl2mKxz6Rk9uzshlxDlk75p6Qngm5zfZS6sbIdqxlAG7JAYg2a3ENxEe/KsP6MLk 5ajupfCe05XpkDXsDrczMNeluC30qC4= Received: from mail-lf1-f72.google.com (mail-lf1-f72.google.com [209.85.167.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-631-iknVuFBFP-e1TJXsUfVvLQ-1; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:34:00 -0400 X-MC-Unique: iknVuFBFP-e1TJXsUfVvLQ-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53987fc3625so1882112e87.0 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:34:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728657239; x=1729262039; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=aoScEoYKpF9KMB5nAaa5AItxD3OJFglSEoUUUyPIJtw=; b=RDGnUMApRKXJHyp87maaHme3iOPGO+/HlgC+V7rWxWFX9nGyaWhxjX0dMDwaAHtpaC r48WCuEdyBXxEsfspH+xHB9udXLCd22uSGY2V1ks6uh7zJ4ShjxkxPt2S9CN83LD2PXj zUh8d8pV+Utvv39pYBx3CBVfH1cbOiTf+6t7k2mIaBcTBdwTq7CBOWYHlEECQLmExiaM OiC8awzYhpyMPd+wen0LsTh2OiAnM2aKMHdTZ/k/BO68ObYfB0HGRwsXKjV8bZVzWryf avowRAQb165PPlzdQ+Uec+WPNs7vJ8X6ztDNR/2TkeYk9f3MwPbJfv/KJPkIrKATJPXD /sRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz9NGs2Mb3FPHSWm1biycjYtbGNIcA8a7uBANA4INTT8ivuL1hi W6vuQ0OGo3iItrF9gCOk2QfPftOYQBSyyqB7lFX/daUYRyjSqz3paq2lc8OudE+m9jdiPzipLW8 UmLbBxTNdGz2HniDZAjoXPPb3x2GrtARFtG98GvQOVhkook7StDK9f82Y17DPQ1fL5y9Ii/SxxM 9I70INwe+fX2Opisk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:6cb:b0:52c:df6f:a66 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539da58c464mr1647010e87.58.1728657238831; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:33:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IErT1LcVBiaRMAK99mcrZXACF3/5lsPCxY8q0uu1vYQykGR29of5Xqb0S2DBIf6fZa83LYAQJKRiNvPeVszSf4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:6cb:b0:52c:df6f:a66 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539da58c464mr1646987e87.58.1728657238410; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 07:33:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20241008173319.441494-1-vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com> <20241010112621.681773-1-vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 16:33:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fib: network byte order IPv4 lookup To: Vladimir Medvedkin Cc: dev@dpdk.org, rjarry@redhat.com, mb@smartsharesystems.com, stephen@networkplumber.org X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 1:29=E2=80=AFPM David Marchand wrote: > > @@ -214,6 +215,7 @@ rte_fib_create(const char *name, int socket_id, str= uct rte_fib_conf *conf) > > rte_strlcpy(fib->name, name, sizeof(fib->name)); > > fib->rib =3D rib; > > fib->type =3D conf->type; > > + fib->flags =3D conf->flags; > > In addition to Robin comments, I also have a concern on the > extensibility aspect. > > conf->flags must be validated against known flags. > Otherwise existing applications may pass wrong stuff and "work fine", > until the day we had one more flag. > And about this flag field, please update release notes and remove the associated deprecation notice. Thank you. --=20 David Marchand