Konstantin, Ah, I see now. Yes, we are using rte_table_acl. Is there a reason these two differ in precedence selection?
Regards, Mike ******************************** Hi, > > Hello, > > Can someone clarify what I am interpreting as a documentation conflict > regarding the "priority" field for rte_table_acl_rule_add_params? > Below documentation says "highest priority wins", but the header file > comment says 0 is highest priority. Based on my testing with > conflicting entries, I would like ask if we can/should update the > documentation/descriptions to state "the lowest non-negative integer priority > value will be selected". Highest priority implies select X, when X > Y >= 0. > However, based on my testing, that is not the case. > Instead, Y is selected. > > From: > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/packet_classif_access_ctrl.html > > When creating a set of rules, for each rule, additional information must be > supplied also: > * priority: A weight to measure the priority of the rules (higher is > better)... If the input tuple matches more than one rule, then the rule > with the higher priority is returned. Note that if the input tuple > matches more than one rule and these rules have equal priority, it is > undefined which rule is returned as a match. It is recommended to assign a > unique priority for each rule. > From: > http://doc.dpdk.org/api/structrte__table__acl__rule__add__params.html > > int32_t priority > ACL rule priority, with 0 as the highest priority I think you are mixing 2 different entities here: librte_acl and librte_table. For librte_acl - higher priority wins. librte_table_acl.c uses librte_acl inside, but AFAIK has reverse ordering for priority: 'lesser priority wins'. Inside it reverts rules priority before adding it into the ACL lib ctx. static int rte_table_acl_entry_add( void *table, void *key, void *entry, int *key_found, void **entry_ptr) { ... if (rule->priority > RTE_ACL_MAX_PRIORITY) { RTE_LOG(ERR, TABLE, "%s: Priority is too high\n", __func__); return -EINVAL; } /* Setup rule data structure */ memset(&acl_rule, 0, sizeof(acl_rule)); ... acl_rule.data.priority = RTE_ACL_MAX_PRIORITY - rule->priority;
