Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] Generic flow director/filtering/classification API

[Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>]

Hi Helin,

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 07:19:18AM +0000, Zhang, Helin wrote:
> Hi Adrien
> 
> Just a double check, do you have any update on the v1 patch set, as now it is the end of October?
> We are extremly eager to see the v1 patch set for development.
> I don't think we need full validation on the v1 patch set for API. It should be together with PMD and example application.
> If we can see the v1 API patch set earlier, we can help to validate it with our code changes. That's should be more efficient and helpful.
> Any comments on my personal understanding?
> 
> Thank you very much for the hard work and kind helps!

I intend to send it shortly, likely this week. For the record, a large part
of this task was also dedicated to implement it on the client side (I've
just read Wei's RFC for a client-side application to which I will reply
separately), in order to validate it from a usability standpoint that led me
to make a few necessary adjustments to the API.

My next submission will include both the updated API with several changes
discussed on this ML and testpmd code (not a separate application) that uses
it. Just hang on a bit longer!

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Adrien Mazarguil
> > Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 1:11 AM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2] Generic flow director/filtering/classification
> > API
> > 
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 08:50:44PM +0200, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Thanks to many for the positive and constructive feedback I've
> > > received so far. Here is the updated specification (v0.7) at last.
> > >
> > > I've attempted to address as many comments as possible but could not
> > > process them all just yet. A new section "Future evolutions" has been
> > > added for the remaining topics.
> > >
> > > This series adds rte_flow.h to the DPDK tree. Next time I will attempt
> > > to convert the specification as a documentation commit part of the
> > > patchset and actually implement API functions.
> > [...]
> > 
> > A quick update, we initially targeted 16.11 as the DPDK release this API would
> > be available for, turns out this goal was somewhat too optimistic as
> > September is ending and we are about to overshoot the deadline for
> > integration (basically everything took longer than expected, big surprise).
> > 
> > So instead of rushing things now to include a botched API in 16.11 with no
> > PMD support, we simply modified the target, now set to 17.02. On the plus
> > side this should leave developers more time to refine and test the API before
> > applications and PMDs start to use it.
> > 
> > I intend to send the patchset for the first non-draft version mid-October
> > worst case (ASAP in fact). I still haven't replied to several comments but did
> > take them into account, thanks for your feedback.
> > 
> > --
> > Adrien Mazarguil
> > 6WIND

-- 
Adrien Mazarguil
6WIND