Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/5] ice: allow matching on meta data

[Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 03:31:01PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> From: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>
> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 09:51:11 +0200
> 
> > Add meta data matching criteria in the same place as protocol matching
> > criteria. There is no need to add meta data as special words after
> > parsing all lookups. Trade meta data in the same why as other lookups.
> > 
> > The one difference between meta data lookups and protocol lookups is
> > that meta data doesn't impact how the packets looks like. Because of that
> > ignore it when filling testing packet.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_switch.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_switch.h
> > @@ -186,12 +186,14 @@ struct ice_adv_rule_flags_info {
> >  };
> >  
> >  struct ice_adv_rule_info {
> > +	/* Store metadata values in rule info */
> >  	enum ice_sw_tunnel_type tun_type;
> >  	u16 vlan_type;
> >  	u16 fltr_rule_id;
> >  	u32 priority;
> >  	struct ice_sw_act_ctrl sw_act;
> >  	struct ice_adv_rule_flags_info flags_info;
> > +	u16 src_vsi;
> 
> Minor: since these 2 bytes will introduce 2-byte hole or padding either
> way, I think it's okay to put this field somewhere around rule ID or
> priority, i.e. other primitives. So that when someone is adding new
> short field, he'll see there is a hole and use it. u16 after 2 big
> structures looks a bit off to me, sorry for the initial confusion with
> this "please no holes at all!11" -- it's highly desired, but not by
> sacrificing logical grouping :D
> 

Good point, it looks a little strange, I will move it :)

Thanks,
Michal

> >  };
> >  
> >  /* A collection of one or more four word recipe */
> [...]
> 
> Thanks,
> Olek