Re: [PATCH v5 4/8]librte_ether:add a common filter API

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

2014-10-17 06:53, Liu, Jijiang:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org]
> > 2014-10-11 13:55, Jijiang Liu:
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_OMAC  0x01
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_OIP   0x02
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_TENID 0x04
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC  0x08
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IVLAN 0x10
> > > +#define ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IIP   0x20
> > > +
> > > +#define RTE_TUNNEL_FLAGS_TO_QUEUE 1
> > 
> > These values requires some comments.
> OK, add comments for these MACROs
> > > +/*
> > > + * Tunneled filter type
> > > + */
> > > +enum rte_tunnel_filter_type {
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_TYPE_NONE = 0,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_OIP = ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_OIP,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC_IVLAN =
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC | ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IVLAN,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC_IVLAN_TENID =
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC | ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IVLAN |
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_TENID,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC_TENID =
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC | ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_TENID,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC = ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_OMAC_TENID_IMAC =
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_OMAC | ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_TENID |
> > > +		ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IIP = ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IIP,
> > > +	RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_TYPE_MAX,
> > > +};
> > 
> > It's absolutely impossible to understand. Keep in mind the first goal of an
> > API: be used (which imply to be understood by users).
> > And I really don't understand why you define values for combination of
> > previous flags. Please, keep it simple.
> 
> The goal of defining values for combination of filter type in order to
> easily distinguish/check if the mandatory parameters are valid for a
> specific filter type, for example, if the filter type is
> RTE_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC_IVLAN,  we just need to check if the inner MAC
> address and inner VLAN ID are valid.
> To limit sanity checks to valid parameters the rte_tunnel_filter_type
> enumeration can be replaced/initialized by bit mask.
> 
> Furthermore, please look at i40e_tunnel_filter_param_check () function
> in "[PATCH v5 5/8]i40e:implement API of VxLAN packet filter in librte_pmd_i40e" patch.
> static int
> +i40e_tunnel_filter_param_check(struct i40e_pf *pf,
> +			struct rte_eth_tunnel_filter_conf *filter) {
> +    ...
> 
> +	if ((filter->filter_type & ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_OMAC) &&
> +		(is_zero_ether_addr(filter->outer_mac))) {
> +		PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot add NULL outer MAC address\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	if ((filter->filter_type & ETH_TUNNEL_FILTER_IMAC) &&
> +		(is_zero_ether_addr(filter->inner_mac))) {
> +		PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot add NULL inner MAC address\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> 
> Actually, If you really don't like rte_tunnel_filter_type definition style,
> and I can change it.

Yes, you can just  replace this "enum rte_tunnel_filter_type" by an integer
like uint16_t. It won't change your tests.

-- 
Thomas