> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rybchenko <arybche...@solarflare.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 6:34 PM
> <samik.gu...@broadcom.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/6] ethdev: add flow shared action API
>
> On 9/16/20 10:20 PM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:52 AM Andrey Vesnovaty <andr...@nvidia.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Ajit
> >>
> >> For shared action configuration I have following suggestion:
> >>
> >> struct rte_flow_shared_action_conf {
> >> uint32_t no_ingress: 1;
> >> uint32_t no_egress: 1;
> >> };
> >> /*...*/
> >> rte_flow_shared_action_create(..., const struct
> rte_flow_shared_action_conf *conf, ...);
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> > Andrey, I think this is good.
> > Application can specify the direction and PMD can decide whether if
> > it needs to honor it or ignore it.
> > Please send the updated version of the patch.
>
> Personally I dislike negative flags, offloads, fields etc.
> Don't we have a policy to avoid it. At least we have it for
> offloads. I see no string reasons here to use negative
> instead of positive here.
Agree I think it is better to use positive values and the same names as the
attribute in the flow.
