On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 9:19 AM Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 9:26 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > wrote: > > > > On 10/15/2019 3:16 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > >>>>> @@ -36,13 +36,6 @@ VMDq = > > >>>>> SR-IOV = > > >>>>> DCB = > > >>>>> VLAN filter = > > >>>>> -Ethertype filter = > > >>>>> -N-tuple filter = > > >>>>> -SYN filter = > > >>>>> -Tunnel filter = > > >>>>> -Flexible filter = > > >>>>> -Hash filter = > > >>>>> -Flow director = > > >>>>> Flow control = > > >>>>> Flow API = > > >>>>> Rate limitation = > > >>>> I suggest adding these features back! > > >>>> > > >>>> "Flow director" and other filters are features that device/driver > supports. > > >>>> > > >>>> And "Flow API" and "filter_ctrl" are methods used to implement > these features. > > >>>> Indeed they are only different APIs to get input from > application/user. > > >>>> > > >>>> It doesn't really mean much to say "Flow API" is supported? So what > is really > > >>>> supported? It matters more what feature is supported. > > >>>> > > >>>> Since we are saying old method is deprecated, we can update the > feature list of > > >>>> drivers which implements filtering features using old method as not > supported. > > >>>> And that is the case with this patch since old APIs are marked as > deprecated, > > >>>> users can't use them to enable a filtering feature. > > >>>> > > >>>> Indeed I am for removing the "Flow API" from feature list, first it > is not a > > >>>> feature, second if it is only method to enable a filtering, and if > filtering is > > >>>> enabled in a driver, what is the point of redundant "Flow API" > listing? > > >>>> > > >>>> I can make a quick patch if there is no objection, thanks. > > >>> > > >>> As I understand it was a decision to avoid details about flow API > support > > >>> in features matrix. Mainly because matrix would be really huge in > > >>> attempt to represent it. The question is why filters/patterns > mentioned > > >>> above are better than others and should be mentioned. > > >>> I'm not against adding some details, just want to understand > criteria. > > >>> Flexible and hash are definitely not well defined. > > >>> What is flow director and which features should be supported to say > yes? > > >>> > > > > > >> > > >> The criteria I have is what users will be interested about a > device/driver. > > >> > > >> Will it be really huge to list filtering capabilities of the devices? > I believe > > >> we can group them into a few groups like above. > > >> Or at least keep existing one and improve it by time and +1 to > clarify them more > > >> but that is something else. > > >> > > >> A device can have capabilities but it is not easy to find if that > capability has > > >> been enabled via DPDK, this kind of feature matrix works for it, and > all > > >> features together makes it much easier than digging datasheets and > code. > > >> > > >> Saying that "Flow API" is enabled for a driver doesn't really gives > any > > >> information to the user if they are interested what kind of filtering > features > > >> are supported by that device/driver. > > > > > > I agree. I think, we need to enumerate rte flow patterns and actions > > > supported by the PMD. > > > Since there was no single place such documentation, we added the same > > > in PMD documentation > > > See 39.8. RTE Flow Support at > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/octeontx2.html > > > > > > And IMO, We should not add deprecated features in the features matrix > as > > > new PMDs are not planning to implement the deprecated APIs. That > > > makes, matrix looks > > > new PMDs do not implement a lot of features, but in reality, those are > > > deprecated and never planning to implement if even though HW supports > it. > > > > > > > +1 to not add deprecated features to the matrix, but those removed ones > [1] are > > not deprecated. Implementing them via "filter_ctrl" is deprecated. Below > > features still can be implemented via "Flow API", that is why I am for > adding > > them back to default.ini. > > Got it. Instead of [1], Can we document it as in the form of rte_flow > semantics(patterns and actions) so > that for the end-user it is very clear. Reason being: > # Expressing "Tunnel filter" or "N-tupe filter" or "Flexible filter" > or "Flow director" etc is very vague in rte_flow semantics > and function is not just limited with above-fixed functions > # The new PMDs also can express the rte_flow aka "Flow API" support > in the rte_flow semantics. > +1 > > > > And announce them as supported per PMD only if they are implemented via > Flow API. > > > > [1] > > Ethertype filter = > > N-tuple filter = > > SYN filter = > > Tunnel filter = > > Flexible filter = > > Hash filter = > > Flow director = >
