From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db5eur01on0046.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.2.46]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EBFB69C8 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:57:16 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Mellanox365.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-Mellanox-com; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=78XW5BGjNn9vuPE76ax9bO6V1UX2nLnug9aDCRAaInQ=; b=qFH+upmO8gSHjlWrwSi7NI2ojfQKNRWj/GQr6iK5etZF0aOImvaMzBz5laA0rqqiw942C9S+PhDRO89ShlsZa0MouO9ebvWYN6OLTgCNKYpkpOw/vbaFLWwxPXT9mSdpQD/37drll06Ue6t28KIMC268MqI9iLJGEFNwaqgKpUU= Received: from HE1PR05MB1100.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.161.115.25) by HE1PR05MB1099.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.161.115.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:57:14 +0000 Received: from HE1PR05MB1100.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.115.25]) by HE1PR05MB1100.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.161.115.25]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:57:14 +0000 From: Yaacov Hazan To: "jingjing.wu@intel.com" Thread-Topic: Flow Director - big endian handling Thread-Index: AdFC2dsmcrsM00CWQmO0TyI0lqFRFA== Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:57:14 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=yaacovh@mellanox.com; x-originating-ip: [193.47.165.251] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; HE1PR05MB1099; 5:tLkQraoOvqjiH4Bp+QEyJxCEhtSuEPmPURjTOM/F55MYJzmSZDT2ESD9L+n1zj+Uyib1kVhUNsEQp4Ua/HeWKK/RGBW+wEsljUESzeUOJyu8GBk7wyI82NUn1Q2Lyndjr7mwJruDOG0nHHG9HX4luA==; 24:DmKKe4JUbA+6+TG5jQYnT2DlrVaGhKUZWY85mzu42DO5Tt9d+rMyMmqkdg1xckjTNa/ufTb9JagOdhstowCbUefEGoXjqxlPUzIspqbj6mA= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:HE1PR05MB1099; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:HE1PR05MB1099; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:HE1PR05MB1099; x-forefront-prvs: 08062C429B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(51444003)(164054003)(199003)(189002)(2501003)(66066001)(122556002)(74316001)(5002640100001)(5003600100002)(40100003)(5001960100002)(229853001)(5004730100002)(3846002)(5008740100001)(102836003)(10400500002)(77096005)(15975445007)(586003)(101416001)(86362001)(6116002)(81156007)(2351001)(11100500001)(33656002)(189998001)(106356001)(16236675004)(92566002)(1220700001)(19625215002)(2900100001)(1096002)(97736004)(105586002)(50986999)(54356999)(110136002)(87936001)(19580395003)(790700001)(76576001)(19300405004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:HE1PR05MB1099; H:HE1PR05MB1100.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: mellanox.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: Mellanox.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Dec 2015 09:57:14.5053 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a652971c-7d2e-4d9b-a6a4-d149256f461b X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR05MB1099 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: [dpdk-dev] Flow Director - big endian handling 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: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 09:57:16 -0000 Hi JingJing, I looked at your patch for flow director - app/testpmd: update flow directo= r commands - a56335925919d26c81dec8accf31c39d2f790c5a. It seems there is some mismatch in the handling of big endian between the f= ilter and mask. In the cmd_flow_director_filter_parsed function, which add the filter value= s, you called to rte_cpu_to_be_16 for the vlan_tci and ports values. But in cmd_flow_director_mask_parsed function, which set the mask, you didn= 't called to rte_cpu_to_be_16 for those values (valn_tci & ports). Does Intel's NICs (or Intel's PMDs) expected form application side to handl= e the big endian in different way for the filter values and the mask values= ? If yes, it is very confusing from the application/user point of view. I think that it is more make sense to leave the decision and handling of th= e big endian to the PMD layer, or at least to keep consistency for the expe= cted handling in the application layer. Thanks, Yaacov.