[dpdk-dev] using rte_flow via tespmd with Intel X552

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 8/2/2017 2:41 PM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> Hi Wenzhuo,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:00:47PM +0000, Lu, Wenzhuo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Zhao1, Wei
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 3:28 AM
>>> To: TETSURO NAKAMURA <nakamura.tetsuro at lab.ntt.co.jp>
>>> Cc: TAKADA Naoki <takada.naoki at lab.ntt.co.jp>; Satoshi NISHIYAMA
>>> <nishiyama.s at lab.ntt.co.jp>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>;
>>> dev at dpdk.org
>>> Subject: RE: using rte_flow via tespmd with Intel X552
>>>
>>> Hi, NAKAMURA
>>>
>>> I have upload 2 documents about command format when creating flow for
>>> NIC igb and ixgbe in the email attachment.
>>> I have decided to commit the context in the doc to doc\guides\nics\ixgbe.rst
>>> before, BUT by now it seems the content of the document is too much To
>>> store there. So, is there any other doc more suitable in DPDK to record this.
>>> And welcome for any other suggestion.
>>> AND, Wenzhuo, what is your opinion for this?
>> I also have the same feeling that it may make the ixgbe.rst too big. 
>> + John and Adrien. Hi John,  Adrien, I'm think about creating a specific doc for rte flow, we can include the examples for every NIC here. Is it good? If so, where's the good place to put it? Thanks.
> 
> Depends on the kind of examples. Code samples or testpmd flow command?
> Unless you mean a document that describes individual rte_flow features
> supported by each NIC?
> 
> Code samples could be added to a new "Programming flow rules" (or something)
> section in doc/guide/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst.
> 
> Another section about NICs could be added in that documentation as well but
> should only contain a short summary for each of them and a link to the
> relevant PMD documentation in nics/$PMD.rst (or elsewhere in the DPDK
> tree), if any.
> 
> If you want to describe individual rte_flow features supported by each NIC,
> I think there's no other choice but to create a bunch of
> doc/guides/nics/features/rte_flow/*.ini files.

Indeed I was thinking doing a change in .ini files related rte flow in 17.11

rte_flow is a method to implement some filtering features, rte_flow
itself is not a device feature. And filtering features already listed in
.ini file.

So I was thinking removing rte_flow from feature table, and update
existing filter features as something like:
"Ethertype filter = L"  --> Feature exist and implemented using Legacy
method.
"Ethertype filter = Y"  --> Feature exist and implemented using rte flow

Does it make sense?

> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: TETSURO NAKAMURA [mailto:nakamura.tetsuro at lab.ntt.co.jp]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 12:22 PM
>>>> To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1 at intel.com>
>>>> Cc: TAKADA Naoki <takada.naoki at lab.ntt.co.jp>; Satoshi NISHIYAMA
>>>> <nishiyama.s at lab.ntt.co.jp>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>;
>>>> dev at dpdk.org
>>>> Subject: Re: using rte_flow via tespmd with Intel X552
>>>>
>>>> Wei Zhao - san
>>>> (Cc'ing Wenzhuo - san)
>>>>
>>>> According to the e-mail thread [1] in April, you have a document about
>>>> command format when creating flows on ixgbe NIC.
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate your uploading that document to community or could
>>>> you just share it with me via an e-mail ??
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/2017-April/001786.html
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Tetsuro
>>>>
>>>> # re-sending the e-mail because I failed to submit the e-mail to
>>>> users at dpdk.org.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Tetsuro Nakamura <nakamura.tetsuro at lab.ntt.co.jp> NTT Network Service
>>>> Systems Laboratories
>>>> TEL:0422 59 6914(National)/+81 422 59 6914(International) 3-9-11,
>>>> Midori-Cho Musashino-Shi, Tokyo 180-8585 Japan
>>>>
>>
>