From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] lib/librte_ether: support l2 tunnel
	operations
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 10:27:32 +0100
Message-ID: <2524747.83qVv48D0D@xps13>
References: <1454051035-25757-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
 <1879903.OgO4X0RlNL@xps13>
 <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC090903439197@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B51E2BA2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  9 Mar 2016 10:29:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l68so62233736wml.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 01:29:14 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC090903439197@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-03-09 01:15, Lu, Wenzhuo:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > 2016-03-08 14:53, Wenzhuo Lu:
> > > +/**
> > > + * l2 tunnel type.
> > > + */
> > > +enum rte_eth_l2_tunnel_type {
> > > +	RTE_L2_TUNNEL_TYPE_NONE = 0,
> > > +	RTE_L2_TUNNEL_TYPE_E_TAG,
> > > +	RTE_L2_TUNNEL_TYPE_MAX,
> > > +};
> > 
> > We already have rte_eth_tunnel_type.
> Seems the tunnels in rte_eth_tunnel_type are all L3 packets. So, I want to add a new type for e-tag, s-tag... as they're l2 packets.
> Do you suggest to merge it into rte_eth_tunnel_type?

Maybe you can keep the L2 prefix and add it in the same enum.
It depends wether the rest of the API is specific to L2 or not.

> > Why this struct is in rte_eth_ctrl.h and not used with rte_eth_dev_filter_ctrl?
> Just want to put it together with rte_eth_tunnel_type :)

> > Why are we still adding some filtering functions after having the assertion that
> > the new filtering API in lib/librte_ether/rte_eth_ctrl.h was generic enough?
> > The filtering API v2 was a total failure.
> > Are we going to add new functions each time a new bit of a header must be
> > parsed by an offloaded filtering?
> > Are we going to add new functions for each new filter of a NIC?
> 
> Sorry, my bad. I'll try to use the existing filter API. Thanks.

OK, using the filtering API v2 is better.
But I'm not confident it is a good API.
If you have any concern, please discuss them. Because we need to
discuss how to make a really generic API which fits with any filtering
(flow steering) offload of any vendor while being descriptive enough
and easy to use.