From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 017FF44157;
Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:37:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E256A402DC;
Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:37:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from fhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com
(fhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.154])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8DE64029C
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:37:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44])
by mailfhigh.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BDFA11400FF;
Tue, 4 Jun 2024 14:37:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 04 Jun 2024 14:37:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h=
cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date
:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1717526229;
x=1717612629; bh=fyhyCRKNB2pCre6lEbQMAogbRQYglQ+zYnWceFcLJVw=; b=
aMIbzGEDXR5jXyNM8vLZj49dZI40SRwHsG7P+VCwyvmCyEFGbAUzFMyc8XH3hdjI
5t2qcLyyssVkijAZbQKguuaULB0y0rKAoJ79KpWj3JsGhyky2aG750HIaI9jPHnH
xll3n42xcyJafqilsngraKfwfVK2XdD/y4uBFhu2+s/D+Hf/3xwgAUYJLYAixU12
2wD27fu6DoW0JftedIVCEFYfkp0pVHLFtw+XXzuJWi5HS3WKJX28QGWIjlcrjz5m
pocEFX+IAPf9JcrMKX6aqhlbCEfVQ81mwxOSzym5snhZ1krMyixdrgMmQR0icZUX
a2DNjSZaHI/CJOZcpPsqOA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=
messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding
:content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id
:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version
:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy
:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1717526229; x=
1717612629; bh=fyhyCRKNB2pCre6lEbQMAogbRQYglQ+zYnWceFcLJVw=; b=E
oxUASFhI7KhoSsunOa5LIx/Bw0nqJrJU44OYOEULHMz/ZBi3LWbwLuSjhjHy45us
pvSDuvjepijl4dYRUrv48IRZCT+pd5MT5+0OimEvSXZ448NWsVWmk9mb13Ef8bRs
4xOeSuEJiBzZC0/8Os6xM6yiVNxTp0BuxAiEoA0NT5G+Uc7bpDss6vRDKkrQ+THC
O5+yPLW9168ABqyYLPnEU2uXyL2do9PGqfke4kNO6koPM92p3dGKuNlhUKKgWzDF
SCMXKHmO0SfmO2C6dC8C0By5AsHksXhgUVGDLXwYixAlYIeHFgQpFQESnx7gS5O0
BtS0BBF+8sAFxXgO4wzXg==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:1F5fZiQsOhFqE5yhuXlBzdi4Gzw7uDqiy1twJp64b7ZABoZmDwscag>
<xme:1F5fZnw_k8rqTwjTJIhhu5sFja7DJH9StGRWvVV19j8n6RO_-nxUj480Ak0tEnQBg
MPSvYhhx9bUIs2GNw>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:1F5fZv3Ha5Ebhe-L5DuplbQgKFDv951eaoIShmEdoBXfW1cf_DMS9CUejVYmCLaQPKJ4zKmJOj31fr4na7HeJwBy8Q>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrvdelgedguddvvdcutefuodetggdotefrod
ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh
necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd
enucfjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhho
mhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqne
cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepjeduveehieevuddutdevfffgtdegkeeuveejffejgedtgeeg
kefgvdeugfefkeejnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh
hfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:1F5fZuDgsMi5EnEkMbepKm3rEX74DzQdi_YyskQ_pkgkBaKDosAMCg>
<xmx:1F5fZrjDHCiyeuUZQBmXUWidn8zrHPFqohQRv6eTpHrOqmvW61B-Zg>
<xmx:1F5fZqpBnWow-RJitCNjGRWtFXAy6ocy5tMYcgm4RT6QS28iaPMeEw>
<xmx:1F5fZuhCSRX9G_IpL8y0pqh9XitbM3d31d84KM8e_thw6QGvnPc23g>
<xmx:1V5fZuoSDwzmMewciHm_CAKnsHhzdg2issgNf-LNLRHnLslLfUNJygwI>
Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue,
4 Jun 2024 14:37:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: rongwei liu <rongweil@nvidia.com>,
Dariusz Sosnowski <dsosnowski@nvidia.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>,
Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>, Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>,
Suanming Mou <suanmingm@nvidia.com>, Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ethdev: add VXLAN last reserved field
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 20:37:05 +0200
Message-ID: <5068960.a9HWlOh95j@thomas>
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR12MB8800ECD345A322AFC4F5DC5CA4F82@PH0PR12MB8800.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
References: <14937324.O6BkTfRZtg@thomas>
<CH3PR12MB8209FC4C9706B0CBAD894C8DABF82@CH3PR12MB8209.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
<PH0PR12MB8800ECD345A322AFC4F5DC5CA4F82@PH0PR12MB8800.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
04/06/2024 18:40, Dariusz Sosnowski:
> > > 04/06/2024 14:38, Rongwei Liu:
> > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
> > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
> > > > @@ -1006,6 +1006,7 @@ static const char *const flow_field_ids[] = {
> > > > "ipv6_flow_label", "ipv6_traffic_class",
> > > > "esp_spi", "esp_seq_num", "esp_proto",
> > > > "random",
> > > > + "vxlan_last_rsvd",
> > > > NULL
> > > > };
> > >
> > > How vxlan_last_rsvd is linked to RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VXLAN_RSVD1 in testpmd?
> > > Just because it is the same order?
>
> Yes, it's because of the order.
> We should refactor this to use array designators.
>
> > > > --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> > > > +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> > > > @@ -2428,6 +2428,7 @@ enum rte_flow_field_id {
> > > > RTE_FLOW_FIELD_ESP_SEQ_NUM, /**< ESP Sequence Number. */
> > > > RTE_FLOW_FIELD_ESP_PROTO, /**< ESP next protocol value. */
> > > > RTE_FLOW_FIELD_RANDOM, /**< Random value. */
> > > > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VXLAN_RSVD1, /**< VXLAN last reserved byte. */
> > > > };
> > >
> > > I think we should use the same naming as in testpmd.
> > > What about RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VXLAN_LAST_RSVD?
> > To be honest, no strong objection per my personal thought. Considering the API "vxlan_hdr" names this field as "uint8_t rsvd1", maybe RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VXLAN_RSVD1 will be clearer for user as 1 vs 1 mapping?
>
> +1 on using RSVD1 so it matches rte_vxlan_hdr definition.
>
> In this patch, "vxlan_last_rsvd" is used in testpmd, so it matches existing "last_rsvd" field in VXLAN item.
> If we choose to use "rsvd1", we should probably rename all other instances of "last_rsvd" to match.
I prefer "vxlan_last_rsvd" for 2 reasons:
- it is more meaningful
- we are adding first, second and third reserved fields to match the 3 bytes of rsvd0 (patch to come)