From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0929B1B61C for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 23:10:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id k202so17694727ioe.10 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:10:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=mYR/YLNXTsc6HfTGhKmuq6+KyDuWwEL/8CHMvqolCQc=; b=sUcZmD+Piti6jdaEVjaVA04LTm7chiMrHH8zCtAzBGRWtWd1xFDkkgfkByhIWxvui/ GtAWiSktUuKDvKyZsJmMx5nWXMlO+zp3A81diaQKY7hKCqLN/HfluIko01zPcgyoVbG5 94/ymyZGTebljmATYXwr9MFW0znJ8yghvEd8tu0T5oWbge8ilbJzq4/205P0htRsARoz yCyZMEpOFw9fNavSOXjEvmNNKNQUlFHPNt9gAvYnlIvGI+ekp1x2lYXExyJLhr+v3vYc Whsp77V2eIKuHKDhvBVLvwT00UutNfXlCwgKdTWaJclU3fDbRObXiGzDGeZLTIjrDqsg wXYA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mYR/YLNXTsc6HfTGhKmuq6+KyDuWwEL/8CHMvqolCQc=; b=D2GGoxyAZOeG7K6vXE/DIrkZFKD87Nh6Nj30DKnQZ47sH47CBkLwNDDI/hzGRpZ5nt IHSijLou+OBGs2HtkOgzsu/sIVhcXzJKNzWJm2wNu2aVPJMXWwmFwcAVA91kuc1wBqGA b/ExffU8LW9B+FR1NqhdinS9j6Z8kEFiG9EUW0E/388LaGFoQb62TXZk7Kex3EPWRf5E K5ABw/p/JF9s+jrC5zk37aBBj0gB5FUumiRflJVQtLDbhUba2QBZi2B7IJbDmR1MuOuJ LPyfRHlwJABwhAr7kuGF2wJP4My2Ys2Or47rA+OTzWlB6wN1h92RqxIfiO10I30JhSRv fbww== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mLb0HAPmynP0rSR57vdUAAsjc2snwodfyxg2JoI9PVX0cTqfTQ2 UAF6va335iIpn0ZIjuheNWZVtk30dzWDW45szlgq9Psj X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotJRAD3hWcDb6B6XD/u6L0ZLYbWjzPd7k0OlEzx3vyaKrW5sI+bVM3Gq57wtGNLFpDo1DJNa3asT6SUhM4vei0= X-Received: by 10.107.145.2 with SMTP id t2mr19500309iod.53.1513980609390; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:10:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.2.53.2 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:10:08 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153123F75@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1513823719-36066-1-git-send-email-qi.z.zhang@intel.com> <1513823719-36066-2-git-send-email-qi.z.zhang@intel.com> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153123F75@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Alex Rosenbaum Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 00:10:08 +0200 Message-ID: To: "Zhang, Qi Z" , Adrien Mazarguil Cc: DPDK , "Doherty, Declan" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC v2 1/5] ether: add flow action to redirect packet in a switch domain X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 22:10:10 -0000 +Adrien On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Qi Zhang wrote: >> > Add action RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SWITCH_PORT, it can be used to >> > redirect >> A verbs would be better suited for an ACTION_TYPE. while ".._TYPE_PORT" is >> a nous. >> Probably ".._TYPE_REDIRECT" would better fit here. > > I agree it will be better to use verbs for action, so we can have TYPE_REDIRECT_TO_PORT/VF/PF..., > But since we already have ACTION_TYPE_VF, ACTION_TYPE_PF ... > Maybe it's better just to follow the same pattern? hemmm, missed these ACTION_TYPE_VF/PF... Adrien, what do you think about these naming conventions?