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 0A075A04B6; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:42:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 539C01C211; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:42:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from wnew4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wnew4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.18]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD831C1BA for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:42:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailnew.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 217651290; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:42:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:42:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm2; bh= DBCIjgMLStUiz+smsnipwQHTwpkQmZWZpS35tfijy2Y=; b=sXBUhtXUDMGBnC/Q qIsvdIfC9jKc9UhtzlIeCXrU/bRGdhKR4Q4hV9h2a2eHDFjMHp7ILsxPxA1R6tM5 p/Jks+Cs8qbu8+yvkf8BwdwpQNd8iUR/g3SM3mcYK4I3O6Tjulhf5x1VXHm3IIxX oIDJT0XP9+oZKGBcDqBEs+ozlmnrYIF0Hhx05ZovbP2JoWQOn5jjXE58gA0eDzrQ dA93czoMTIeXystVzla35pA+/HXKyXB5tAYjhS3fy3RLwhzG6pIldywgexEekOvM dZaHrFWQSyC7O7Llz5EtCaBh3Zl3cTXTcOjpMuFfShFai0G8aqBRUpRBpcvB7erl SrgVvg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=DBCIjgMLStUiz+smsnipwQHTwpkQmZWZpS35tfijy 2Y=; b=NkN1bY4LRGhnunIOc00DUDAa+cRqKNd2S2Jo7UeFHvxqo43WQvo97BrOP UiTESB9VU1u7PFv6PIyLyfhkNbPnmf/3FRsFjobGmj2FnbEMvoo4Csf6VVjg8FB2 r397qqVsIoZ1tCb4g+FhqNa1Tx7lofkFN1PjuncjLSmgOLMSvYhBmTKI7VZ7sblv K6zejrgghyGdsPGS/0sFsxna+W5hJl5pkEaJPhatTNgZVwPQ51ohupMUyuORoQHh v1IFyTKPwfSmPsmIAJLXaSD21fArW5GpsJjWyEsAf8DcrGImhy4Y53JRg17f+ihi xa6/vgp/4YUC0iPhhvQPFuQuMDPSw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrheejgdduheegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudeggfdvfeduffdtfeeglefghfeukefgfffhueejtdetuedtjeeu ieeivdffgeehnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghruf hiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 26F133064610; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 16:41:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: orika@nvidia.com, Dekel Peled Cc: ferruh.yigit@intel.com, arybchenko@solarflare.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, olivier.matz@6wind.com, wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, beilei.xing@intel.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com, matan@nvidia.com, shahafs@nvidia.com, viacheslavo@nvidia.com, dev@dpdk.org, asafp@nvidia.com Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 22:41:56 +0200 Message-ID: <12619574.BvRjRT2TxV@thomas> In-Reply-To: <97bc93abb2093db8eebba0fbe1b9692afb1e7095.1602494556.git.dekelp@nvidia.com> References: <97bc93abb2093db8eebba0fbe1b9692afb1e7095.1602494556.git.dekelp@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 01/11] ethdev: add extensions attributes to IPv6 item 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 12/10/2020 12:43, Dekel Peled: > - * Note: IPv6 options are handled by dedicated pattern items, see > - * RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_IPV6_EXT. > + * Dedicated flags indicate existence of specific extension headers. > + * Every type of extension header can use a dedicated pattern item, or > + * the generic item RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_IPV6_EXT. I don't understand this last sentence. > */ > struct rte_flow_item_ipv6 { > struct rte_ipv6_hdr hdr; /**< IPv6 header definition. */ > + uint32_t hop_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Hop-by-Hop Options extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t rout_ext_exist:1; "rout" looks weird. Would be "route" appropriate? > + /**< Routing extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t frag_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Fragment extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t auth_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Authentication extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t esp_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Encapsulation Security Payload extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t dest_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Destination Options extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t mobil_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Mobility extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t hip_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Host Identity Protocol extension header exists. */ > + uint32_t shim6_ext_exist:1; > + /**< Shim6 Protocol extension header exists. */ About the field names, the "_exist" suffix is pretty clear, but without being able to say why, I feel it is a strange name. I was thinking about renaming the fields with a "has_" prefix. Does it look better?