> On Oct 5, 2018, at 6:39 AM, Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com> > wrote: > > On 10/5/18 4:31 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> 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" >>> >>> https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmails.dpdk.org%2Farchives%2Fdev%2F2018-August%2F110194.html&data=02%7C01%7Cyskoh%40mellanox.com%7Cefd5b454b5ac4c84947108d62ac82a8c%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636743436575292609&sdata=2WbhDkF89hUV16zER4sfhvD5qDjw6geFQqE0kJQgdyM%3D&reserved=0 >>> >>> 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? > > As for me, I'd prefer to see dedicated union member something like > it was suggested in [1]. > > Andrew. > > [1] > https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmails.dpdk.org%2Farchives%2Fdev%2F2018-September%2F111954.html&data=02%7C01%7Cyskoh%40mellanox.com%7Cefd5b454b5ac4c84947108d62ac82a8c%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636743436575292609&sdata=QbrBkMWIWVMlKb8839FG3U72VfLhRo%2BjGSHkTXT8ocQ%3D&reserved=0
FYI, I also mentioned that when I reviewed mlx5 part of this patchset and Dekel acked. He'll make the change and submit a new version once he's back to the office. Thanks, Yongseok