From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <cnliuhb@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ot0-f172.google.com (mail-ot0-f172.google.com
 [74.125.82.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26FD01559
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  7 Jun 2018 09:19:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-ot0-f172.google.com with SMTP id w13-v6so10331796ote.11
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:19:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=h7xkweDUm+pisSI+yz24LqDrBhmn6ccRG+IgLdFVv3A=;
 b=X7BRM1jwi+feCvIUe2ZkReoeh4FR7ngqs/47J4Q1Frh5sjdzT78zGxMyHQhTVuvstl
 mrJKjROWFiZ4ZCw3Crr6r4EDBaupnEHtIwnz9lMHP3OiE15mppsmLoytR9p6u8gMGlv7
 OryQzAN+DbESnHXph2UDeaJrKMywmpmTPRsvRO4CJ4OGbn2Z9IP0LsfOFUfdwaKOgylL
 CUna4vf+uXiW2aZKxamCI/2u4jSu3xpWG9Hf4ScY6XsdRIDplBIwUiCYNXq3vrLf+6pf
 7xQ0dab/ZxOJRzxfV2nPsbOFxgSw4SOnU3r+VnbUj3GTcRvDazErtt+mDzmJZRYTEanY
 N9hg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=h7xkweDUm+pisSI+yz24LqDrBhmn6ccRG+IgLdFVv3A=;
 b=N6iBrueifKdNP3SLr8uClBKmLtvnw1EzjQWRrBB+wf/M0WQUxf258m/qc/JO4AqIxd
 hINvYFQIxbOA/schIeXTElTI9QrP4yXGsmjEdAI+0UlErNx9aqkE8mKxPVlVZvuJSs3D
 TxI1adbvF/kXlEjz0lBHZdvqERvu7TxriPMZRjaFMWEFq22QDTwZEJ00CgK70Td/cXHm
 2UDCz+ZtuH0L2F94WC3AG5LTjLpDIwIoo02N9xIg7u3yLYyoTe++TsR8JDJVfWEU/oi9
 ccIvY5AgSriPFzwecnaF+mU4FSc/yAdXZ1SHCO+ULwCigqndskSZGyWXuEBpbLveYpbM
 k/aA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2uvGNiGlYbwzlRi+E2p3Uv1A2/pvm0vxWwMHETiVDqKo96XE8p
 ZBsyfP2bUqe2g3mUliGq2aKoRmqTj1ova3tBkJyY8Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKLb16XIE5c5LKhBQOMZCFjfEmgYRoxo3ubIC77Sgr07Fvb37OZhyPLjZXRBq0GrFa9joOvlLTf2A4OprpwiT4=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4c86:: with SMTP id m6-v6mr323382otf.273.1528355945290; 
 Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a4a:acc7:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP;
 Thu, 7 Jun 2018 00:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: hongbo liu <cnliuhb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 15:19:04 +0800
Message-ID: <CAATCt2T1YUXGBq37pgWpvSzG=3nTY=nuuXMYrZ584NvEEfvG-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Subject: [dpdk-dev] Why rte_pipeline.c only support forwarding to same table
	in different entries?
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2018 07:19:06 -0000

Hi,

I am frustrated when designing pipeline table.

I am trying to have one ACL table 0 to forward different traffic to
different table, but it failed.

And I noticed that the following checks in rte_pipeline.c:
/****************************************************************
if ((entry->action == RTE_PIPELINE_ACTION_TABLE) &&
table->table_next_id_valid &&
(entry->table_id != table->table_next_id)) {
RTE_LOG(ERR, PIPELINE,
"%s: Tree-like topologies not allowed\n", __func__);
return -EINVAL;
}
****************************************************************/

Is there any reason why adding this limitation?

In openflow, the limitation is the forward table_id must be larger than
current table_id, and the final
table should not have forward table action.

By the way, it still does not work after removing upper checks.

Is it difficult to support forwarding to multiple tables in different
entries?

--
Hobby