From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6704EA0506; Wed, 18 May 2022 01:43:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222824068B; Wed, 18 May 2022 01:43:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from forward501p.mail.yandex.net (forward501p.mail.yandex.net [77.88.28.111]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528FD40041; Wed, 18 May 2022 01:43:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sas2-0b997f88789f.qloud-c.yandex.net (sas2-0b997f88789f.qloud-c.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:c14:710a:0:640:b99:7f88]) by forward501p.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 90FC162131BB; Wed, 18 May 2022 02:43:27 +0300 (MSK) Received: from sas1-1f4a002bb12a.qloud-c.yandex.net (sas1-1f4a002bb12a.qloud-c.yandex.net [2a02:6b8:c14:3908:0:640:1f4a:2b]) by sas2-0b997f88789f.qloud-c.yandex.net (mxback/Yandex) with ESMTP id 3nKe1eCoMR-hRfijeLS; Wed, 18 May 2022 02:43:27 +0300 X-Yandex-Fwd: 2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1652831007; bh=+DWZiY3oJXush1rLiRgec/B3/M0mFet8IYhkoA/FDAE=; h=In-Reply-To:From:Subject:References:Date:Message-ID:To; b=lPzIFCfO8vOHdpcz2ofz0PDwD1TcCbDteeNf5/Q37uM8Sxv/r2P3+4Qg7DUuRSo5h NVa7sqjvlou9kScrQvj4bGPlWHvkjIuFOY5i1dul6ZjMhZgrpbrPvHlwY9W25CegQo Gm/2w2XdBL++XQEWVwcP8c1FEIKgG53dF9TDwJJg= Authentication-Results: sas2-0b997f88789f.qloud-c.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Received: by sas1-1f4a002bb12a.qloud-c.yandex.net (smtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id fXW4MGICRZ-hQCGHG2X; Wed, 18 May 2022 02:43:26 +0300 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client certificate not present) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 00:43:24 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.0 Subject: Re: Does ACL support field size of 8 bytes? Content-Language: en-US To: Ido Goshen , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "users@dpdk.org" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <59727248-59ac-ab74-5ac3-e6eb7163647e@yandex.ru> From: Konstantin Ananyev In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Konstantin Ananyev >> Sent: Sunday, 15 May 2022 23:54 >> To: Ido Goshen ; Ananyev, Konstantin >> ; users@dpdk.org; dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: Re: Does ACL support field size of 8 bytes? >> >> >> My concern was it is sort of awkward in terms of input_field value for rules with >> 8B long. > > [idog] I'm always puzzled with the input_index field. > I just randomly group the small size fields (u8, u16) without any applicative meaning. > Feels like it's redundant in the API an can be done internally by the lib like you do now for u64 > (though it'll be less trivial to do) > Yep agree, field_index and offset - seems enough, other stuff can probably be figured out by analyzing these two fields. Though as you said, it would require some extra effort.