From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF93A10DA for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 08:06:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2D01C20C; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 08:06:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp [202.19.227.74]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6CAD1C1F4 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 08:06:56 +0200 (CEST) X-dD-Source: Outbound Received: from zssg-mailmd106.ddreams.local (zssg-mailmd900.ddreams.local [10.160.172.63]) by zssg-mailou102.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAE441200F7; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from t131sg-mailcc11.ddreams.local (t131sg-mailcc11.ddreams.local [100.66.31.86]) by zssg-mailmd106.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTP id <0PVL0110SIBHGY20@dDREAMS>; Fri, 02 Aug 2019 15:06:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from t131sg-mailcc11 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by t131sg-mailcc11.ddreams.local (unknown) with SMTP id x7266rTf050652; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:53 +0900 Received: from zssg-mailmf104.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by zssg-mailmf104.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC447E6038; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from zssg-mailmf104.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B7118E6060; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A31A8E605D; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:28 +0900 (JST) X-IMSS-HAND-OFF-DIRECTIVE: localhost:10026 Received: from zssg-mailmf104.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587818E605A; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from zssg-mailua103.ddreams.local (unknown [10.160.172.62]) by zssg-mailmf104.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:06:28 +0900 (JST) Received: from [10.87.198.18] (unknown [10.160.183.129]) by zssg-mailua103.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTPA id <0PVL00F4XIAJHRB2@dDREAMS>; Fri, 02 Aug 2019 15:06:19 +0900 (JST) Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 15:06:19 +0900 From: Hideyuki Yamashita In-reply-to: <20190731113045.8EC1.17218CA3@ntt-tx.co.jp_1> References: <20190730122539.GD4512@6wind.com> <20190731113045.8EC1.17218CA3@ntt-tx.co.jp_1> Message-id: <20190802150619.D107.17218CA3@ntt-tx.co.jp_1> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.74.02 [ja] X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 To: Hideyuki Yamashita Cc: Adrien Mazarguil , Ye Xiaolong , "users@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Why flow can not be created? X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Helllo Experts, Q1. Are there any NICs which supports entag/detag VLAN? I searched source DPDK source code with keyword "OF_POP_VLAN" or "OF_POP_VLAN" and found some codes within mlx5_flow_tcf.c and cxgbe_flow.c. Q2. Are there any plans in DPDK community to update document about NIC to update support of rte_flow? I have heard the situation about document form Adrien, and to be honest I felt it is very hard to take try and error with testpmd for every NIC. BR< Hideyuki Yamashita NTT TechnoCross