Re: [dpdk-dev] Changes to 5tuple IPv4 filters in dpdk v2.0

[Vladimir Medvedkin <medvedkinv@gmail.com>]

Hi Kam,

1) The reason is discussed in
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005179.html
2) No, it's still not supported (on current NICs). At the moment ntuple is
supported only by igb and ixgbe. If you look at
drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c you can see ntuple_filter_to_5tuple
function which translate rte_eth_ntuple_filter to ixgbe_5tuple_filter_info,
so mask can be either UINT32_MAX or 0. It's hardware limitation (see 82599
datasheet 7.1.2.5 L3/L4 5-tuple Filters).

Regards,
Vladimir

2015-08-04 23:44 GMT+03:00 Kamraan Nasim <knasim@sidebandnetworks.com>:

> Hi DPDK community,
>
> I've been using DPDK v1.7 and v1.8 for the past year. On updating to
> v2.0.0,  I see that *rte_5tuple_filter* has been deprecated as well as the
> associated install/remove call,* rte_eth_dev_add_5tuple_filter()*
>
> I now see that rte_eth_ntuple_filter has been added in place.
>
> 1) Is there a specific reason for removing backward compatibility? As in is
> there a known issue with rte_5tuple_filter infra that was discovered in
> v2.0?
>
>
> 2) One limitation of rte_5tuple_filter was that it could not be used to
> filter /24 or /16 ip addresses(subnet filtering). I now see that the
> src_ip_mask and dst_ip_mask is 32 bits and a separate
> RTE_NTUPLE_FLAGS_SRC_IP
> <
> http://dpdk.org/doc/api/rte__eth__ctrl_8h.html#aff1204ca0b33628610956f840dd9b206
> >
>   has been introduced. Does this imply that we NOW support subnet
> filtering(use mask for wildcard masking)?
>
>
> Any help or pointers on the subject will be greatly appreciated!!!
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kam
>