From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rahul Lakkireddy Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] ethdev: add packet filter flow and new behavior switch to fdir Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 12:38:36 +0530 Message-ID: <20151211070834.GA10425@scalar.blr.asicdesigners.com> References: <1dabf80beb341e03923a535d0fa13f244350af34.1449747042.git.rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Felix Marti , Nirranjan Kirubaharan , Kumar A S To: "Chilikin, Andrey" Return-path: Received: from stargate3.asicdesigners.com (stargate.chelsio.com [12.32.117.8]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD388E6F for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:08:54 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Andrey, On Thursday, December 12/10/15, 2015 at 07:46:42 -0800, Chilikin, Andrey wrote: > Hi Rahul, > > If ABI for fdir is going to be changed should we then take more general approach to accommodate other NICs as well? For example, for "rte_eth_ipv4_flow" you have "tos" and "proto" fields added, but "ttl" was left out of scope. I believe that "rte_eth_udpv6_flow" should be compatible with new IPv4 structure, so "flow label", "tc", "next header" and "hop limit" to be added as well as other NICs might have support for fdir rules for all these fields. > I agree. I'll wait for some more review comments if there are any and then post a v2 RFC series with above changes. Thanks, Rahul