On 9/27/2018 2:57 PM, Dekel Peled wrote:
> As described in [1], a new rte_flow item is added to support metadata
> to use as flow rule match pattern.
> The metadata is an opaque item, fully controlled by the application.
>
> The use of metadata is relevant for egress rules only.
> It can be set in the flow rule using the RTE_FLOW_ITEM_META.
>
> In order to avoid change in mbuf API, exisitng field buf.hash.fdir.hi
> is used to carry the metadata item. This field is used only in
> ingress packets, so using it for egress metadata will not cause
> conflicts.
>
> Application should set the packet metadata in the mbuf dedicated field,
> and set the PKT_TX_METADATA flag in the mbuf->ol_flags.
> The NIC will use the packet metadata as match criteria for relevant
> flow rules.
>
> This patch introduces metadata item type for rte_flow RTE_FLOW_ITEM_META,
> along with corresponding struct rte_flow_item_meta and ol_flag
> PKT_TX_METADATA.
>
> [1] "[RFC,v2] ethdev: support metadata as flow rule criteria"
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2018-August/110194.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Dekel Peled <dek...@mellanox.com>
<...>
> @@ -526,6 +532,12 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
> uint32_t hi;
> /**< First 4 flexible bytes or FD ID, dependent on
> PKT_RX_FDIR_* flag in ol_flags. */
> + /**
> + * Above member has optional use on egress:
> + * Application specific metadata value
> + * for flow rule match.
> + * Valid if PKT_TX_METADATA is set.
> + */
> } fdir; /**< Filter identifier if FDIR enabled */
Any objection/comment to use hash.fdir.hi for this new "metadata" meaning?
Olivier?
