Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3] examples/l3fwd: merge l3fwd-acl code into l3fwd

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 1/23/2019 5:26 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 23/01/2019 18:20, Ananyev, Konstantin:
>> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
>>> 23/01/2019 17:32, Ferruh Yigit:
>>>> On 3/10/2017 8:58 PM, rkerur at gmail.com (Ravi Kerur) wrote:
>>>>> This patchset merges l3fwd-acl and l3fwd code into common directory.
>>>>> Adds config file read option to build LPM and EM tables.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ravi Kerur (3):
>>>>>   examples/l3fwd: merge l3fwd-acl code into l3fwd
>>>>>   examples/l3fwd: add config file support for lpm
>>>>>   examples/l3fwd: add config file support for exact
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ravi,
>>>>
>>>> These l3fwd patches are in patchwork for a long time, I am updating the patchset
>>>> as rejected, if it is still relevant please send a new version on top of latest
>>>> repo.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for any inconvenience caused.
>>>>
>>>> For reference patches:
>>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21696/
>>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21695/
>>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/21697/
>>>>
>>>> doc one:
>>>> https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/24211/
>>>
>>> This work was going in the right direction.
>>>
>>
>> Totally agree.
>>
>>> Konstantin, as the maintainer of the ACL library,
>>> do you think it is worth to keep this example as standalone or merged?
>>
>> My vote is definitely for merging.
>> That would give us single l3fwd app with 3 different routing methods
>> (lpm, hash, acl) selectable at run-time, plus routing tables in config file.
> 
> OK, so we just need to find a volunteer.

There was a "Nice to have - Future" section in Roadmap webpage [1], does it help
putting there?

Also we talked about GSOC recently, can this be an item for it?


[1]
http://core.dpdk.org/roadmap/#future

> Ravi started the work a long time ago and did not receive enough review.
> I'm afraid he's not available anymore.
> 
>