[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/1] ethdev: add new ext hdr for gtp psc

[Raslan Darawsheh]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for your comments and review, I'll attempt to handle and fix in the next version.

Kindest regards,
Raslan Darawsheh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko at oktetlabs.ru>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 3:19 PM
> To: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at nvidia.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: ferruh.yigit at intel.com; Ori Kam <orika at nvidia.com>;
> ivan.malov at oktetlabs.ru; ying.a.wang at intel.com; olivier.matz at 6wind.com;
> Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo at nvidia.com>; Shiri Kuzin <shirik at nvidia.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/1] ethdev: add new ext hdr for gtp psc
> 
> On 6/8/21 3:17 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > On 4/29/21 11:10 AM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote:
> >> Define new rte header for gtp PDU session container based on RFC
> >> 38415-g30
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland at nvidia.com>
> >> ---
> >>  lib/net/rte_gtp.h | 78
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/net/rte_gtp.h b/lib/net/rte_gtp.h index
> >> 6a6f9b238d..5a850a26e4 100644
> >> --- a/lib/net/rte_gtp.h
> >> +++ b/lib/net/rte_gtp.h
> >> @@ -61,6 +61,84 @@ struct rte_gtp_hdr_ext_word {
> >>  	uint8_t next_ext;     /**< Next Extension Header Type. */
> >>  }  __rte_packed;
> >>
> >> +/**
> >> + * Optional extension for GTP with next_ext set to 0x85
> >> + * defined based on RFC 38415-g30.
> >> + */
> >> +__extension__
> >> +struct rte_gtp_psc_generic_hdr {
> >> +	uint8_t ext_hdr_len; /**< PDU ext hdr len in multiples of 4 bytes
> >> +*/ #if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_BIG_ENDIAN
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +	uint8_t qmp:1; /**< Qos Monitoring Packet */
> >> +	uint8_t pad:3; /**< type specfic pad bits */
> >> +	uint8_t spare:2; /**< type specific spare bits */
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */ #else
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */
> >> +	uint8_t spare:2; /**< type specific spare bits */
> >> +	uint8_t pad:3; /**< type specfic pad bits */
> >> +	uint8_t qmp:1; /**< Qos Monitoring Packet */
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +#endif
> >> +	uint8_t data[0]; /**< variable length data feilds */ }
> >> +__rte_packed;
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * Optional extension for GTP with next_ext set to 0x85
> >> + * type0 defined based on RFC 38415-g30  */ __extension__ struct
> >> +rte_gtp_psc_type0_hdr {
> >> +	uint8_t ext_hdr_len; /**< PDU ext hdr len in multiples of 4 bytes
> >> +*/ #if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_BIG_ENDIAN
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +	uint8_t qmp:1; /**< Qos Monitoring Packet */
> >> +	uint8_t snp:1; /**< Sequence number presence */
> >> +	uint8_t spare_dl1:2; /**< spare down link bits */
> >> +	uint8_t ppp:1; /**< Paging policy presence */
> >> +	uint8_t rqi:1; /**< Reflective Qos Indicator */
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */ #else
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */
> >> +	uint8_t rqi:1; /**< Reflective Qos Indicator */
> >> +	uint8_t ppp:1; /**< Paging policy presence */
> >> +	uint8_t spare_dl1:2; /**< spare down link bits */
> >> +	uint8_t snp:1; /**< Sequence number presence */
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +#endif
> >> +	uint8_t data[0]; /**< variable length data feilds */ }
> >> +__rte_packed;
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * Optional extension for GTP with next_ext set to 0x85
> >> + * type1 defined based on RFC 38415-g30  */ __extension__ struct
> >> +rte_gtp_psc_type1_hdr {
> >> +	uint8_t ext_hdr_len; /**< PDU ext hdr len in multiples of 4 bytes
> >> +*/ #if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_BIG_ENDIAN
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +	uint8_t qmp:1; /**< Qos Monitoring Packet */
> >> +	uint8_t dl_delay_ind:1; /**< dl delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t ul_delay_ind:1; /**< ul delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t snp:1; /**< Sequence number presence ul */
> >> +	uint8_t n_delay_ind:1; /**< N3/N9 delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t spare_ul2:1; /**< spare up link bits */
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */ #else
> >> +	uint8_t qfi:6; /**< Qos Flow Identifier */
> >> +	uint8_t spare_ul2:1; /**< spare up link bits */
> >> +	uint8_t n_delay_ind:1; /**< N3/N9 delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t snp:1; /**< Sequence number presence ul */
> >> +	uint8_t ul_delay_ind:1; /**< ul delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t dl_delay_ind:1; /**< dl delay result presence */
> >> +	uint8_t qmp:1; /**< Qos Monitoring Packet */
> >> +	uint8_t type:4; /**< PDU type */
> >> +#endif
> >> +	uint8_t data[0]; /**< variable length data feilds */ }
> >> +__rte_packed;
> >> +
> >>  /** GTP header length */
> >>  #define RTE_ETHER_GTP_HLEN \
> >>  	(sizeof(struct rte_udp_hdr) + sizeof(struct rte_gtp_hdr))
> >>
> >
> > This way the structure is very hard to read.
> > May I ask to indent field comments as it is done in other rte_net
> > structures (e.g. rte_ipv4_hdr, rte_udp_hdr, rte_geneve_hdr).
> > Personally I don't care if it will be indent by TABs or spaces,
> > however, it looks like TABs are used in more places.
> >
> 
> Also there are spelling bugs [1].
> 
> [1] http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/test-report/2021-April/191649.html