From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD600201 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 21:27:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B99623031; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:27:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:27:40 -0500 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=mesmtp; bh=1RBCSKqCTOcnlf4/eAmKYKcc84ohl6p3HoWk1e7EN4E=; b=o+gzT5dMRCcL RHEwRPuQyZiP/0TRg0Z+kHEC1SRYXTJ31QpQDcYNofr2J39kZDgFG5t5q6F+HhJY cmBIjakNq8rbJPTunR42JiJQdFTXewFyavhlv0TG+mQ9PiEHEjjvWW1YR0avfe/c ut42C8F7DavUCHzDkA0urxhfxpmzh7Y= 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=1RBCSKqCTOcnlf4/eAmKYKcc84ohl6p3HoWk1e7EN 4E=; b=QYvSlHUTa7RKO0ezNqiWtbBXRcAfiOG0PDQf/2uR6Py9LRjUWthEA9oEP ix63Jm4TJL0lOkkneG6SkLzhM3CUMuBfMrR/BjGuXrquTX4OjHUsPvTd4zNFmS4q 9P+t3OIkCeo/r92PYbMtEXY/TnZoWrgKrhyuXKrRpve/OUm4vYyqHQRjUgfQoodt Z1qWyqES5AWz9xmmuG5ZZiYqlG9zWNoXft4yQKXieCdwS4a/2GpkaFh/TZS6/TRD hiTm8sONTjAnNIrvaVwMc/Mmnts2KyhCoKemcMyxGxnJlkpPdwb+0hX/XMGgpF5M y2XnEZsTHCZrNF0cuAcUzB69pYp9Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledriedtgddufeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffkjg hfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcu oehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrd horhhgnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhf rhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiii gvpedt 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 622F21027C; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:27:39 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Stephen Hemminger , Ravi Kerur , dpdk-dev , "Mcnamara, John" Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 21:27:37 +0100 Message-ID: <1968366.YAxucaVsza@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <1489008729-28784-2-git-send-email-rkerur@gmail.com> <2922307.MMPdoxV78S@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] examples/l3fwd: merge l3fwd-acl code into l3fwd 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 20:27:41 -0000 23/01/2019 20:36, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/23/2019 5:26 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 23/01/2019 18:20, Ananyev, Konstantin: > >> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > >>> 23/01/2019 17:32, Ferruh Yigit: > >>>> On 3/10/2017 8:58 PM, rkerur at gmail.com (Ravi Kerur) wrote: > >>>>> This patchset merges l3fwd-acl and l3fwd code into common directory. > >>>>> Adds config file read option to build LPM and EM tables. > >>>>> > >>>>> Ravi Kerur (3): > >>>>> examples/l3fwd: merge l3fwd-acl code into l3fwd > >>>>> examples/l3fwd: add config file support for lpm > >>>>> examples/l3fwd: add config file support for exact > >>>> > >>>> Hi Ravi, > >>>> > >>>> These l3fwd patches are in patchwork for a long time, I am updating the patchset > >>>> as rejected, if it is still relevant please send a new version on top of latest > >>>> repo. > >>>> > >>>> Sorry for any inconvenience caused. > >>>> > >>>> For reference patches: > >>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21696/ > >>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21695/ > >>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21697/ > >>>> > >>>> doc one: > >>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/24211/ > >>> > >>> This work was going in the right direction. > >>> > >> > >> Totally agree. > >> > >>> Konstantin, as the maintainer of the ACL library, > >>> do you think it is worth to keep this example as standalone or merged? > >> > >> My vote is definitely for merging. > >> That would give us single l3fwd app with 3 different routing methods > >> (lpm, hash, acl) selectable at run-time, plus routing tables in config file. > > > > OK, so we just need to find a volunteer. > > There was a "Nice to have - Future" section in Roadmap webpage [1], does it help > putting there? Yes > Also we talked about GSOC recently, can this be an item for it? Yes Good suggestions :)