Hi all, Just looking for more comments if any 😊
Best, Ori > -----Original Message----- > From: Ori Kam > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 9:03 PM > To: 'Stephen Hemminger' <step...@networkplumber.org> > Cc: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com>; Dekel Peled > <dek...@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@mellanox.com>; Adrien > Mazarguil <adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>; Thomas Monjalon > <tho...@monjalon.net>; Yongseok Koh <ys...@mellanox.com>; > ferruh.yi...@intel.com; arybche...@solarflare.com; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: add generic L2/L3 tunnel > encapsulation actions > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:step...@networkplumber.org] > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 8:29 PM > > To: Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com> > > Cc: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemi...@mellanox.com>; Dekel Peled > > <dek...@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@mellanox.com>; > Adrien > > Mazarguil <adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>; Thomas Monjalon > > <tho...@monjalon.net>; Yongseok Koh <ys...@mellanox.com>; > > ferruh.yi...@intel.com; arybche...@solarflare.com; dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: add generic L2/L3 tunnel > > encapsulation actions > > > > On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 19:19:25 +0300 > > Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > > > Currenlty the encap/decap actions only support encapsulation > > > of VXLAN and NVGRE L2 packets. > > > There is a need to add more L2 tunnels and also L3 tunnels. > > > > > > One issue with the current approch is the duplication of code. > > > For example the code for handling NVGRE and VXLAN are exactly the > > same, > > > and each new tunnel will have the same exact structure. > > > > > > Last issue with the current approach is the use of rte_items. > > > The most significant issue with that is that the PMD needs to convert > > > the items and this hurts the insertion rate. Other issue is that > > > the rte_item has 3 members while we only need the spec (last and mask > > > are useless). I know that the extra member have only small memory > > > impact but considering that we can have millions of rules, this became > > > more important consideration, and it is bad practice to add a variable > > > that is never used. > > > > > > My suggestion is to create 2 commands, one for encapsulation of L2 > > > packets and one for encapsulation of L3 tunnels. > > > The parameters for those functions will be a uint8_t buffer with > > > a length parameter. > > > > > > The current approach is not implemented yet in drivers yet, and > > > is marked as experimental, so it should be removed. > > > > > > Any comments will be hugely appreciated. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com> > > > > What about binary and source compatibilities with older release? > > I'm not sure what you mean, currently this feature is not implemented > In any PMD (as far as I can see) so no one uses it, and it is marked as > experimental. In any case if this is an issue we can keep the old one and just > add the new one. > > Best, > Ori
