Re: [RFC v2 1/2] ethdev: add packet filter flow and new behavior switch to fdir
From: Wu, Jingjing <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-13 01:13:27
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h index ce224ad..5cc22a0 100644 --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h@@ -74,7 +74,11 @@ extern "C" { #define RTE_ETH_FLOW_IPV6_EX 15 #define RTE_ETH_FLOW_IPV6_TCP_EX 16 #define RTE_ETH_FLOW_IPV6_UDP_EX 17 -#define RTE_ETH_FLOW_MAX 18 +#define RTE_ETH_FLOW_PKT_FILTER_IPV4_TCP 18 #define +RTE_ETH_FLOW_PKT_FILTER_IPV4_UDP 19 #define +RTE_ETH_FLOW_PKT_FILTER_IPV6_TCP 20 #define +RTE_ETH_FLOW_PKT_FILTER_IPV6_UDP 21 +#define RTE_ETH_FLOW_MAX 22
How to distinguish RTE_ETH_FLOW_PKT_FILTER_IPV4_XX with RTE_ETH_FLOW_NONFRAG_IPV4_XX, what is the difference?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
/** * Feature filter types@@ -407,6 +411,9 @@ struct rte_eth_l2_flow { struct rte_eth_ipv4_flow { uint32_t src_ip; /**< IPv4 source address to match. */ uint32_t dst_ip; /**< IPv4 destination address to match. */ + uint8_t tos; /**< IPV4 type of service to match. */ + uint8_t proto; /**< IPV4 proto to match. */ + uint8_t ttl; /**< IPV4 time to live to match. */ }; /**@@ -443,6 +450,10 @@ struct rte_eth_sctpv4_flow { structrte_eth_ipv6_flow { uint32_t src_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 source address to match. */ uint32_t dst_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 destination address to match. */ + uint8_t tc; /**< IPv6 traffic class to match. */ + uint32_t flow_label; /**< IPv6 flow label to match. */ + uint8_t next_header; /**< IPv6 next header to match. */ + uint8_t hop_limit; /**< IPv6 hop limits to match. */ };
There is also a patch http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/9661/ which added these fields. Maybe we can merge them together.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+struct rte_eth_pkt_filter_flow { + enum rte_eth_pkt_filter_type type; /**< Type of filter */ + enum rte_eth_pkt_filter_type prio; + /**< Prioritize the filter type when a packet matches several types */ + struct rte_eth_pkt_filter pkt; /**< Packet fields to match. */ + struct rte_eth_pkt_filter mask; /**< Mask for matched fields. */ +}; + +/** * An union contains the inputs for all types of flow */ union rte_eth_fdir_flow {@@ -514,6 +570,7 @@ union rte_eth_fdir_flow { struct rte_eth_ipv6_flow ipv6_flow; struct rte_eth_mac_vlan_flow mac_vlan_flow; struct rte_eth_tunnel_flow tunnel_flow; + struct rte_eth_pkt_filter_flow pkt_filter_flow; };
Why not use rte_eth_XX_flow directly but add a new one? Is it because of the mask? If so, how about to add a field in rte_eth_fdir_input like:
struct rte_eth_fdir_input {
uint16_t flow_type;
union rte_eth_fdir_flow flow;
/**< Flow fields to match, dependent on flow_type */
union rte_eth_fdir_flow flow_mask;
struct rte_eth_fdir_flow_ext flow_ext;
/**< Additional fields to match */
};
Thanks
Jingjing