Re: [dpdk-dev] ethdev flow director/filtering/steering API

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 4/16/2019 10:33 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 4/12/19 8:57 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 4/11/2019 9:43 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>> On 4/11/19 10:49 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>>> About the features called flow director, filtering or flow steering,
>>>> we have some overlap in our API that we should clean.
>>>> It is especially important when considering to freeze the API for stability.
>>>>
>>>> Please read this deprecation notice from December 2016:
>>>>
>>>> * ethdev: the legacy filter API, including
>>>>    ``rte_eth_dev_filter_supported()``, ``rte_eth_dev_filter_ctrl()`` as well
>>>>    as filter types MACVLAN, ETHERTYPE, FLEXIBLE, SYN, NTUPLE, TUNNEL, FDIR,
>>>>    HASH and L2_TUNNEL, is superseded by the generic flow API (rte_flow) in
>>>>    PMDs that implement the latter.
>>>>    Target release for removal of the legacy API will be defined once most
>>>>    PMDs have switched to rte_flow.
>>>>
>>>> We must mark the eth_dev_filter API as deprecated and decide about
>>>> a date to remove it.
>>>>
>>>> Which PMD is implementing this API and not rte_flow?
>>> In accordance with feature matrix is it i40e_vec, ixgbe_vec and qede, but
>>> I think it is just a mistake in documentation.
>>>
>>> Flow API support tick is missing for many PMDs which actually implement
>>> (as far as I can see): bonding, dppa2, e100, mlx4, qede, mvpp2, softnic.
>>> I've added maintainers to CC.
>> I think having both "Flow control" and "Flow API" is confusing, it looks to me
>> "Flow control" is name of the feature, "Flow API" is implementation detail and
>> other implementation detail is "Flow director"
>>
>>  From the consumers point of view, to they need to know if the flow control
>> implemented using "Flow API"? This information looks like more driver internal.
> 
> Flow control and flow API are absolutely different features.
> Flow control is about Ethernet pauses etc.

Yes they are, not sure what I was thinking, scratch what I said ...

> Flow API is about filtering and actions.
> Flow director is mainly filtering approach and I would agree to classify 
> it as
> implementation detail. I'd consider to move it under flow API umbrella
> finally, but I don't know enough details on it.

I was trying to say "flow api" is not target, target is "filtering" support,
"flow api" it method to have it, perhaps can merge "flow API" & "Flow director"
under "flow filtering" ...

> 
>> Keeping only "Flow control" in feature list, and remove "Flow API" & "Flow
>> director", and set "Flow control" as support both with implementations makes
>> sense to me. What do you think?
>>
>>>> If there are still some, deadlines should help them to be converted :)
>>>> If some help is needed, please ask.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, after more than 2 years of notice, I think it is fair to mark
>>>> the legacy API as deprecated in 19.05 release.
>>> I agree. I think it is a good idea.
>>>
>>> Andrew.
>