From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C52B1A0613 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 04:31:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 195341C02E; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 04:31:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp (dish-sg.nttdocomo.co.jp [202.19.227.74]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B86871BFE0 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 04:31:11 +0200 (CEST) X-dD-Source: Outbound Received: from zssg-mailmd104.ddreams.local (zssg-mailmd900.ddreams.local [10.160.172.63]) by zssg-mailou101.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA6B120121; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:31:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from t131sg-mailcc12.ddreams.local (t131sg-mailcc12.ddreams.local [100.66.31.87]) by zssg-mailmd104.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTP id <0PVH00PWAIZYWH50@dDREAMS>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:31:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from t131sg-mailcc11 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by t131sg-mailcc12.ddreams.local (unknown) with SMTP id x6V2VAch051892; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:31:10 +0900 Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06EB17E603A; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058D78E605D; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with SMTP id 04E848E6058; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:54 +0900 (JST) X-IMSS-HAND-OFF-DIRECTIVE: localhost:10026 Received: from zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EE538E6062; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from zssg-mailua106.ddreams.local (unknown [10.160.172.62]) by zssg-mailmf105.ddreams.local (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from [10.87.198.18] (unknown [10.160.183.129]) by zssg-mailua106.ddreams.local (dDREAMS) with ESMTPA id <0PVH00ZUJIZ98J30@dDREAMS>; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:46 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 11:30:46 +0900 From: Hideyuki Yamashita In-reply-to: <20190730122539.GD4512@6wind.com> References: <20190730193738.8EBB.17218CA3@ntt-tx.co.jp_1> <20190730122539.GD4512@6wind.com> Message-id: <20190731113045.8EC1.17218CA3@ntt-tx.co.jp_1> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.74.02 [ja] X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 To: Adrien Mazarguil Cc: Ye Xiaolong , "users@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Why flow can not be created? X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" Hello Adrien, Thanks for your answer. Now I understand the situation. I will try to test mlx4 or mlx5. Thanks again. BR, Hideyuki Yamashita NTT TechnoCross > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 07:37:38PM +0900, Hideyuki Yamashita wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Does anybody whether PMD other than i40e support > > VID+dstMAC matching? > > > > It is very hard for me to read all PMD code for just to know > > the support of VID+dstMAC as matching pattern. > > > > Somebody, please help me. > > Unfortunately right now trial & error using testpmd is the most effective > approach to determine whether specific combinations are supported by any > given NIC. > > Ideally doc/guides/nics/features.rst [1] should document each rte_flow > feature reflected in doc/guide/nics/features/*.ini for individual PMDs [2], > but that list is currently too incomplete to be useful. > > Now to answer your question, although those are likely not the only ones, I > know from experience that both mlx4 and mlx5 support flow rules matching VID > + dst MAC simultaneously. > > [1] http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/features.html > > [2] http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/overview.html > > -- > Adrien Mazarguil > 6WIND