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 1C04CA0093; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 16:25:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0E940151; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 16:25:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5612C400D4 for ; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 16:25:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC7FC5C012A; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:25:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:25:26 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1667921126; x= 1668007526; bh=tte2YXVMsObjCdBv0ML2iCySaahQYci3TYAO+ijOf8o=; b=C mYMCCmBGEsKlBLTbcg0Au3VJUxGYqEJt4ciP8pYwZKGbiHcAKFc1zDTr/9BnUcmS cxScPGyWO3T8v1OEAaRarcM494++UJGNdltQNg1bNSzkDQ4HzeLHmBDWgcZ2gSjA +V+CFZkQPO2Sah3LJroO2RLia9Q+r01BOLX37rbDYwzQumoth/FlOZGTwOLxjz6e CzXkrK1ULwVfhcPCOfIcDfK8HaWphzgOlkxrsqPNDrpipIy6kPtMh6RECliQ7hKY sgRVvdwfB7jXmR8Y0egupBDKyNX4aFMkty5VmQ9xxC2GpM0A88emVFyEjJGnJV/K +y5DzYRgeImOfk/9n/KGg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1667921126; x= 1668007526; bh=tte2YXVMsObjCdBv0ML2iCySaahQYci3TYAO+ijOf8o=; b=b Q9LXwIl9O+Ywq6pvxjkLsZkNSpCRmulilap5eDMIl1FyhqO1OQUzxWSQQwcTPEho J904lxk1Dv4CC6KwDKAxAaFSmDxJCXDESGo01MP5mosDG3WDdp9LeSsuDYBK5eX9 TKYA8LNLfYPDd5qUyE+uEpDahaybDUKwzalicwM3ZzVEwuxY9df19sO/l0qg1MnL 9IpvwAN5whrfuyX0XYmprEIRNwyJ2hLaj1eVQ7TMIcaqcSNz9d5qgqhumYXcvFrM VtXixzxbBvPWo/HFwXB1JdRWVV08FYrKH+D59CGae1XT1NY1kI6vJyf5aHqoBYKY UKHn1bjzYdSy9EoeQLMjA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrfedtgdejkecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieek gfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:25:25 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Andrew Rybchenko Cc: Rongwei Liu , matan@nvidia.com, viacheslavo@nvidia.com, orika@nvidia.com, Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org, rasland@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ethdev: add special flags when creating async transfer table Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2022 16:25:23 +0100 Message-ID: <1712111.oqx4rD5t72@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <2068231.htQpZWrp2x@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 08/11/2022 15:38, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 11/8/22 16:29, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 08/11/2022 12:47, Andrew Rybchenko: > >> On 11/8/22 14:39, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > >>> On 11/4/22 13:44, Rongwei Liu wrote: > >>>> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h > >>>> index 8858b56428..1eab12796f 100644 > >>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h > >>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h > >>>> @@ -5186,6 +5186,34 @@ rte_flow_actions_template_destroy(uint16_t > >>>> port_id, > >>>> */ > >>>> struct rte_flow_template_table; > >>>> +/** > >>>> + * @warning > >>>> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice. > >>>> + * > >>>> + * Special optional flags for template table attribute. > >>>> + * Each bit stands for a table specialization > >>>> + * offering a potential optimization at PMD layer. > >>>> + * PMD can ignore the unsupported bits silently. > >>>> + */ > >>>> +enum rte_flow_template_table_specialize { > >>>> + /** > >>>> + * Specialize table for transfer flows which come only from wire. > >>>> + * It allows PMD not to allocate resources for non-wire > >>>> originated traffic. > >>>> + * This bit is not a matching criteria, just an optimization hint. > >>>> + * Flow rules which match non-wire originated traffic will be missed > >>>> + * if the hint is supported. > >> > >> Sorry, but if so, the hint changes behavior. > > > > Yes the hint may change behaviour. > > > >> Let's consider a rule which matches both VF originating and > >> wire originating traffic. Will the rule be missed (ignored) > >> regardless if the hint is supported or not? > > > > If the hint RTE_FLOW_TRANSFER_WIRE_ORIG is used, > > the PMD may assume the table won't be used for traffic > > which is not coming from wire ports. > > As a consequence, the table may be implemented on the path > > of wire traffic only. > > In this case, the traffic coming from virtual ports > > won't be affected by this table. > > To answer the question, a rule matching both virtual and wire traffic > > will be applied in a table affecting only wire traffic, > > so it will still apply (not completely ignored). > > If so, it is not a hint. It becomes matching criteria > which should be in pattern as we discussed. It is not a strict matching because the PMD is free to support it or not.