From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] ethdev: define new ethdev API rx_classification_filter_ctl Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 16:20:54 +0200 Message-ID: <33553897.HNdRDVj5YS@xps13> References: <1409105634-29980-1-git-send-email-jingjing.wu@intel.com> <1793573.SnjKVZ6loZ@xps13> <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8ADC20D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: "Wu, Jingjing" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F8ADC20D-0J0gbvR4kTg/UvCtAeCM4rfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" 2014-08-28 13:39, Wu, Jingjing: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > > I'm OK to change APIs but you should remove the old one, or at least, > > implement your new API in existing drivers to allow deprecation of the > > old API. > > I think it would help if you start by doing ixgbe work and then apply it > > to i40e. > > > > Yes, it will be perfect if we can use this new API to achieve flow director > setting all types of NICs. But the concern is downward compatibility. In this case, cleanup is more important than compatibility. > Users who is planning update DPDK version need to change their code > to adapt such changes. Yes, but we can keep deprecated function during 1 release. > That's why we choose a new API instead of modifying current APIs. And > Of course, the ideal plan is adding such XXX_ctl function in Ixgbe and > Igb to moving smoothly without removing current APIs. Yes > > I don't think flow director is a specific feature. We shouldn't have > > to care if port is i40e or ixgbe to setup flow director. > > Is it possible to have a common API and maybe an inheritance of the > > common structure with PMD specific fields? > > Yes, flow director is not a specific feature. Even ixgbe and i40 use the same > name. But the context and key have much difference. That's why I called it > specific. > > Yes, it's a good idea about an inheritance of the common structure. I think it > may support new NIC integration in future. We can do it with the new API > architecture. But the concern is still how to be compatible with old version. There is no compatibility blocker here. If we can keep deprecated functions a while, we'll do. Otherwise, just go with the new API. I prefer we concentrate on good design rather than on compatibility. Thanks -- Thomas