Hi Jeff,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev <dev-boun...@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Jeff Guo
> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 6:41 PM
> To: xiaolong...@intel.com; qi.z.zh...@intel.com
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; jingjing...@intel.com; yahui....@intel.com;
> simei...@intel.com; jia....@intel.com
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-dev v2 3/4] app/testpmd: support GTP PDU type
>
> Add gtp pdu type configure in the cmdline.
Why not use ITEM_GTP_PSC_PDU?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Guo <jia....@intel.com>
> ---
> v1:
> no change
> ---
> app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 11 ++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
> index a78154502..c1bd02919 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ enum index {
> PORT_ID,
> GROUP_ID,
> PRIORITY_LEVEL,
> + GTP_PSC_PDU_T,
>
> /* Top-level command. */
> SET,
> @@ -1626,6 +1627,13 @@ static const struct token token_list[] = {
> .call = parse_int,
> .comp = comp_none,
> },
> + [GTP_PSC_PDU_T] = {
> + .name = "{GTPU pdu type}",
> + .type = "INTEGER",
> + .help = "gtpu pdu uplink/downlink identifier",
> + .call = parse_int,
> + .comp = comp_none,
> + },
Why is this created at this level?
This looks like is should be written totally differently.
> /* Top-level command. */
> [FLOW] = {
> .name = "flow",
> @@ -2615,7 +2623,8 @@ static const struct token token_list[] = {
> [ITEM_GTP_PSC_PDU_T] = {
> .name = "pdu_t",
> .help = "PDU type",
> - .next = NEXT(item_gtp_psc, NEXT_ENTRY(UNSIGNED),
> item_param),
> + .next = NEXT(item_gtp_psc, NEXT_ENTRY(GTP_PSC_PDU_T),
> + item_param),
> .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY_HTON(struct
> rte_flow_item_gtp_psc,
> pdu_type)),
> },
> --
> 2.20.1
