From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841A6A0093; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 09:53:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2570E400D7; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 09:53:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from shelob.oktetlabs.ru (shelob.oktetlabs.ru [91.220.146.113]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D03CD400D4 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 09:53:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.38.17] (aros.oktetlabs.ru [192.168.38.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by shelob.oktetlabs.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3261E66; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 11:53:01 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 shelob.oktetlabs.ru 3261E66 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=oktetlabs.ru; s=default; t=1667983981; bh=PIIS4/LMwwLpoMP6jFW/FI92DUaeq7F+qhZBwHey1aA=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=m2Y6FhRpikSIzp/jQL2nI4DtOE6i2SeI6B8BlNtxN4jGKCcg4UjrtjVOMdDOlUCt8 vAEtEEmwS3tSiHoR/kQKMTFpyD9aezHZF/Q9Wu0fuOgL4vxWLHryNzOEHVKTXoQSe/ gYKHN4NeF2JrtVNaoC1YBevDJ+HB4RAJrM5KqmTQ= Message-ID: <7ac25cbb-55ca-b1f3-0729-b46a34ad467c@oktetlabs.ru> Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 11:53:00 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ethdev: add special flags when creating async transfer table Content-Language: en-US To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Rongwei Liu , matan@nvidia.com, viacheslavo@nvidia.com, orika@nvidia.com, Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org, rasland@nvidia.com References: <2068231.htQpZWrp2x@thomas> <1712111.oqx4rD5t72@thomas> From: Andrew Rybchenko Organization: OKTET Labs In-Reply-To: <1712111.oqx4rD5t72@thomas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 11/8/22 18:25, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 08/11/2022 15:38, Andrew Rybchenko: >> On 11/8/22 16:29, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> 08/11/2022 12:47, Andrew Rybchenko: >>>> On 11/8/22 14:39, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >>>>> On 11/4/22 13:44, Rongwei Liu wrote: >>>>>> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>>> index 8858b56428..1eab12796f 100644 >>>>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>>> @@ -5186,6 +5186,34 @@ rte_flow_actions_template_destroy(uint16_t >>>>>> port_id, >>>>>> */ >>>>>> struct rte_flow_template_table; >>>>>> +/** >>>>>> + * @warning >>>>>> + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this API may change without prior notice. >>>>>> + * >>>>>> + * Special optional flags for template table attribute. >>>>>> + * Each bit stands for a table specialization >>>>>> + * offering a potential optimization at PMD layer. >>>>>> + * PMD can ignore the unsupported bits silently. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> +enum rte_flow_template_table_specialize { >>>>>> + /** >>>>>> + * Specialize table for transfer flows which come only from wire. >>>>>> + * It allows PMD not to allocate resources for non-wire >>>>>> originated traffic. >>>>>> + * This bit is not a matching criteria, just an optimization hint. >>>>>> + * Flow rules which match non-wire originated traffic will be missed >>>>>> + * if the hint is supported. >>>> >>>> Sorry, but if so, the hint changes behavior. >>> >>> Yes the hint may change behaviour. >>> >>>> Let's consider a rule which matches both VF originating and >>>> wire originating traffic. Will the rule be missed (ignored) >>>> regardless if the hint is supported or not? >>> >>> If the hint RTE_FLOW_TRANSFER_WIRE_ORIG is used, >>> the PMD may assume the table won't be used for traffic >>> which is not coming from wire ports. >>> As a consequence, the table may be implemented on the path >>> of wire traffic only. >>> In this case, the traffic coming from virtual ports >>> won't be affected by this table. >>> To answer the question, a rule matching both virtual and wire traffic >>> will be applied in a table affecting only wire traffic, >>> so it will still apply (not completely ignored). >> >> If so, it is not a hint. It becomes matching criteria >> which should be in pattern as we discussed. > > It is not a strict matching because the PMD is free to support it or not. It cannot be optional matching criteria. Matching criteria must be always mandatory. Otherwise application does not know what to expect and behaviour may legitimately vary on different vendors.