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 D25C3A0A0A; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:44:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53EEF40693; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:44:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com (szxga05-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.191]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8629D40684 for ; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 01:44:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4F4qG41Q9yzwQFT; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 08:42:52 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.40.190.165) by DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Wed, 24 Mar 2021 08:44:42 +0800 To: Ferruh Yigit , "orika@nvidia.com" CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , "humin (Q)" , "Thomas Monjalon" , Andrew Rybchenko References: <3f5ffb32474b4fe78b006a78bee11c1c@huawei.com> <8a6224ba-301e-d5a2-d515-265b3bf1b97d@intel.com> From: fengchengwen Message-ID: <7b4e9585-2ca2-f4cd-afce-499b4c3f8633@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 08:44:41 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8a6224ba-301e-d5a2-d515-265b3bf1b97d@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.40.190.165] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] How about add rte flow get capablity APIs 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 Sender: "dev" On 2021/3/23 18:27, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 3/23/2021 12:52 AM, Fengchengwen wrote: >> Hi, Ori and Ferruh >> >>    Currently, the rte flow APIs lack of get capability APIs, upper-application >> >> could not get the device capability unless look doc or code or even test it. >> >>    Maybe it's a good idea to add the get capability like traffic manager >> >> framework, what do you think? >> > > Not providing capability was a design decision, because it may not be possible to provide capability information correctly. > > The preferred method is 'rte_flow_validate()'. > Application should call 'rte_flow_validate()' to decide if a rule can be created or not, and take an action accordingly. > > . Got it, Thank you, Ferruh