From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70A01FB3E for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:51:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f82so126708206wmf.1 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:51:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=5KARg76TlBuk1ei6mQ3n1dZaZJx2CXmqaHQC+RwwpPc=; b=E8CTcoboitLPnss6Rbniq1iWzgRNEZvrc7ee1KwYZti0EcndQ7EkMosEBgzkzntMkJ 2Nf9y7WH8dnlV1I1mdnj4qzCHkE67+AHMOU9jW8mAo46SD3oIZEtByyJuU0fjbrv8FAj NSyShaCaTGvXBPEYm7XUbZHMaqCK/L4g2AjSn5D1zM9ng0RSwMKWJt6G8qOTmeOMV8ZL 4aZo9WIc6zDcKivIqUsbwu50JNwM9f6RHNKhZHT3jCXBmti2HQKSKIJxfbLaiGFmiFEV 122KOXI3PE1iBCV/gf3mu42wy4XHXporfa7m9ux3FTqSasINgMUbLD5uueTZcL8lvnWh PBOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=5KARg76TlBuk1ei6mQ3n1dZaZJx2CXmqaHQC+RwwpPc=; b=tDFzoi7+32sph9cDqLXqGofu0morVHE+AwIqnTGci5V1xDr/3xgrJ+mEDRfl42NNIc A1PzJs//96pGpL6CM2Y2pfRiJlzTPfI6uYLBbf1u0eQek8eyIEoKXLVEuL2gwAnLleKI CoqHFwOSyBMGfGLwd8FaSQh/x71NvTaSqM8NMCN81xiVSJPwLxb8F8sJ6X1naCzD2l17 TTFi9CYeuj1gftsEJxewanGzv1awfQwbQZPK3ofppeE0lZiLIEtEUuihpJiXTW6Gud88 hpYUUB+pm3y7J8VPK4nLkYlQBh/6wuyau8TGbbNR3HcNStGWrPSra+VJ9x7mHJ40oY1F k1Ww== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLmkEZx55VkdVa4I5iJerkiLrhMoy9RL513tMQ+emCDdBmNfO7OgVoljnrRYVRwGoMk X-Received: by 10.28.63.16 with SMTP id m16mr1349134wma.113.1482231087142; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:51:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from 6wind.com (guy78-3-82-239-227-177.fbx.proxad.net. [82.239.227.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm21520913wmd.1.2016.12.20.02.51.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Dec 2016 02:51:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 11:51:18 +0100 From: Adrien Mazarguil To: "Mcnamara, John" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Kevin Traynor Message-ID: <20161220105118.GS10340@6wind.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 25/25] doc: describe testpmd flow command 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: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:51:27 -0000 On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:44:07PM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Adrien Mazarguil > > Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 5:49 PM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 25/25] doc: describe testpmd flow command > > > > Document syntax, interaction with rte_flow and provide usage examples. > > > > Signed-off-by: Adrien Mazarguil > > > > ... > > > > + > > +- Check whether a flow rule can be created:: > > + > > + flow validate {port_id} > > + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress] > > + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end > > + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end > > + > > +- Create a flow rule:: > > + > > + flow create {port_id} > > + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress] > > + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end > > + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end > > + > > +- Destroy specific flow rules:: > > + > > + flow destroy {port_id} rule {rule_id} [...] > > + > > +- Destroy all flow rules:: > > + > > + flow flush {port_id} > > + > > Just a note: > > The verbs destroy and flush don't sound right here. Create/destroy are common > verbs pairs for objects but these actions are more like add/remove. I guess the > names come from the underlying APIs which possibly are creating/freeing > objects/structures but maybe they should be called add/remove as well. > > And flush generally applies to a pipeline or a queue. The action here is closer > to "remove all". > > Probably not worth reworking at this stage if it hasn't bothered anyone else. Well, Kevin Traynor made a similar suggestion to which I replied that the name would be modified if enough people complained [1]. I understand your point but for some reason I keep hearing a flushing noise every time all rules are removed at once, hence the name. Problem is also that we now have 3 PMD series floating on the ML that depend on the current definition. If we decided to change it, I suggest doing so in a separate fix. A few more complaints from developers are needed before it's too late for 17.02. > > +underlying device in its current state but stops short of creating it. > > +It is bound to ``rte_flow_validate()``:: > > + > > + flow validate {port_id} > > + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress] > > + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end > > + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end > > + > > Here and elsewhere the indentation should be the RST standard 3 spaces, > similar to the rest of the doc. This is only worth changing if you > do some other revision of this doc. > > Otherwise very good documentation. > > Acked-by: John McNamara Thanks, I'll make those changes if anything else warrants a v4. [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/050973.html -- Adrien Mazarguil 6WIND