From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FD6590F for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 08:19:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Oct 2016 00:19:21 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,573,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="1061663610" Received: from fmsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.201]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Oct 2016 00:19:21 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx111.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.5) by FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 00:19:20 -0700 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by fmsmsx111.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 00:19:20 -0700 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.139]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.2]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:19:18 +0800 From: "Zhang, Helin" To: Adrien Mazarguil , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] Generic flow director/filtering/classification API Thread-Index: AQHSGnSSvmWbm36hOkWTD4Q/mE1HvaDCVzHA Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 07:19:18 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20160705181646.GO7621@6wind.com> <20160929171053.GP17252@6wind.com> In-Reply-To: <20160929171053.GP17252@6wind.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] Generic flow director/filtering/classification API X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 07:19:22 -0000 Hi Adrien Just a double check, do you have any update on the v1 patch set, as now it = is the end of October? We are extremly eager to see the v1 patch set for development. I don't think we need full validation on the v1 patch set for API. It shoul= d be together with PMD and example application. If we can see the v1 API patch set earlier, we can help to validate it with= our code changes. That's should be more efficient and helpful. Any comments on my personal understanding? Thank you very much for the hard work and kind helps! Regards, Helin > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Adrien Mazarguil > Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 1:11 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Thomas Monjalon > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] Generic flow director/filtering/classifi= cation > API >=20 > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 08:50:44PM +0200, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Thanks to many for the positive and constructive feedback I've > > received so far. Here is the updated specification (v0.7) at last. > > > > I've attempted to address as many comments as possible but could not > > process them all just yet. A new section "Future evolutions" has been > > added for the remaining topics. > > > > This series adds rte_flow.h to the DPDK tree. Next time I will attempt > > to convert the specification as a documentation commit part of the > > patchset and actually implement API functions. > [...] >=20 > A quick update, we initially targeted 16.11 as the DPDK release this API = would > be available for, turns out this goal was somewhat too optimistic as > September is ending and we are about to overshoot the deadline for > integration (basically everything took longer than expected, big surprise= ). >=20 > So instead of rushing things now to include a botched API in 16.11 with n= o > PMD support, we simply modified the target, now set to 17.02. On the plus > side this should leave developers more time to refine and test the API be= fore > applications and PMDs start to use it. >=20 > I intend to send the patchset for the first non-draft version mid-October > worst case (ASAP in fact). I still haven't replied to several comments bu= t did > take them into account, thanks for your feedback. >=20 > -- > Adrien Mazarguil > 6WIND