From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <rsanford@prolexic.com>
Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com
 [209.85.212.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DC4DE0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:32:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id cc10so4904791wib.16
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:33:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
 :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=tEV4Pp9bsa5YnuOITSor9DjET4A9P7S3ahp0YMBYFdQ=;
 b=ha7IiLEwaVqUg0BKC2uRatXRGIyod6bayj9rmVwJOSM2bp6+jNkG8TmzxQ7vo0JQHJ
 pb/v8ctuYDJCbWCvOxxAQUgCJd555yNcefhiLkYaqZxZQMyt2YVtB3gS73fYEsd/99Xa
 fQogr5b1wPBxI7/zwYi3qhzPltYCHX/l/bW9KoGwzb3GR4z56OM8kTjykcS1IhhfWUuC
 gCVArFUn4pwreInrx8zG4p/JN2n76wv/1uwRQRhyOKrFJ4sox067iimP+65mVZKfej42
 43+RECbCJxTGwK26nwBiTHIbfaYxuvLXz5hYrxyC/XKb2m89XiMDWYOKw/aeXpvEvROM
 +Rbw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlfMu9mHnW1PlSt0Z4DhwHYMtRhbUiAyRK2QkpMMgzTrn2Os2El/fWfJb8uRdWmRGapf6fn
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.195.13.164 with SMTP id ez4mr8860171wjd.11.1389364395756;
 Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:33:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.20.202 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:33:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAEykdvo5Qc0kUAsVoCCWyPApYsRD6SEXS_e=o_xiMPPoDdvmUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFmpvUOOEFTeqEMHrMNKsAjAzYCaHvANDV_iVHMExLQaZvo=dg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEykdvo5Qc0kUAsVoCCWyPApYsRD6SEXS_e=o_xiMPPoDdvmUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:33:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFmpvUN4n1+grrN-mVQP6jQLBEFyTq6AGCKLeeGPDfJahSAHVQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Robert Sanford <rsanford@prolexic.com>
To: Maxime Leroy <maxime.leroy@6wind.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Comments regarding Flow Director support in PMD IXGBE
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://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: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:32:03 -0000

Hello Maxime,

Thank you for taking the time to research these flow director issues and a
more complete solution.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Maxime Leroy <maxime.leroy@6wind.com>
 wrote:
> But it will be nice to have a small test with ipv6 traffic to be sure
> about this point.
>
> Would you like to provide a patch to remove this useless "if" please ?
>
> (Note: the set_ipv6_mask field of the input_mask structure need to be
> removed too)
...
> Thus I agree with your analyze, the fdir api is not coherent.
> I think all the parameters of the fdir api should be in network order.
...
> The testpmd application need to be updated in consequence to provide ip
mask
> in network order (in lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline.c):
...
> Would you like to provide and test a patch to fix this issue, please ?


Yes, we will do as you suggest:
1. Test with IPv6 traffic.
2. Make appropriate changes to flow director code and testpmd.
3. Update comments in the structure definitions to indicate byte order.
4. Provide the patch.


--
Regards,
Robert