Dim 25 avr 2021, à 19:01, Gregory Etelson a écrit :
> Hello Thomas,
>
> > Dim 25 avr 2021, à 17:57, Gregory Etelson a écrit :
> > > Tunnel offload API requires application to query PMD for specific flow
> > > items and actions. Application uses these PMD specific elements to
> > > build flow rules according to the tunnel offload model.
> > > The model does not restrict private elements location in a flow rule,
> > > but the current MLX5 PMD implementation expects that tunnel offload
> > > rule will begin with PMD specific elements.
> > > The patch removes that placement limitation in MLX5 PMD.
> > >
> > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Fixes: 4ec6360de37d ("net/mlx5: implement tunnel offload")
> >
> > Cc: stable must be just after the Fixes line.
> >
> > There is a testpmd patch in the same series, is it OK to be merged in mlx
> > tree?
>
> The tunnel offload model can be complicated.
> The testpmd patch that comes with this one emphasizes how application
> can construct a flow rule without placement restrictions.
> I think that both patches should be merged.
That's not the question.
One patch should be merged in mlx tree, while the other one should target
next-net.
In such a situation, quite often we split in different series.
For this case, it's up to Raslan and Ferruh to agree on how to proceed.
