+Dekel
Add Dekel to see if this is an issue.
Thanks,
Daniel
> On Apr 2, 2019, at 3:23 PM, benli ye <danielbenl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Developers,
>
> I am adding two FDIR rule (one is for UDP and the other is for TCP) for mlx5
> pmd driver. The rules are listed below.
> struct rte_eth_fdir_filter filt[MAX_FDIR_PROTO] = {
> {
> .input.flow_type = RTE_ETH_FLOW_NONFRAG_IPV4_TCP,
> .input.flow.tcp4_flow.ip.dst_ip = dip,
> .input.flow.tcp4_flow.dst_port = dport,
>
> .action.behavior = RTE_ETH_FDIR_ACCEPT,
> .action.report_status = RTE_ETH_FDIR_REPORT_ID,
> .soft_id = 0,
> },
> {
> .input.flow_type = RTE_ETH_FLOW_NONFRAG_IPV4_UDP,
> .input.flow.udp4_flow.ip.dst_ip = dip,
> .input.flow.udp4_flow.dst_port = dport,
>
> .action.behavior = RTE_ETH_FDIR_ACCEPT,
> .action.report_status = RTE_ETH_FDIR_REPORT_ID,
> .soft_id = 1,
> },
> };
>
> However, mlx5 lib prevent me to doing this as when it treats the two rules
> are the same.
>
> I debugged for a while and found flow_fdir_cmp() didn’t compare the protocol
> type in field items of struct mlx5_fdir. So should this be a bug for mlx5?
>
> flow_fdir_cmp(const struct mlx5_fdir *f1, const struct mlx5_fdir *f2)
> {
> if (FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, attr) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l2) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l2_mask) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l3) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l3_mask) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l4) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, l4_mask) ||
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, actions[0].type))
> return 1;
> if (f1->actions[0].type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_QUEUE &&
> FLOW_FDIR_CMP(f1, f2, queue))
> return 1;
> return 0;
> }
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
