On 5/23/2023 7:59 AM, Ori Kam wrote: > Hi > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@amd.com> >> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 1:28 PM >> >> On 5/18/2023 10:48 PM, Alexander Kozyrev wrote: >>> Introduce the new rte_flow_update() API allowing users >>> to update the action list in the already existing rule. >> >> If the API is only to update actions, does make sense to rename it to >> explicitly state this, like: >> `rte_flow_action_update()` >> >> Same for async version of the API. >> > > I'm O.K with the suggested name. > Maybe just change action to actions? >
Both OK for me, existing APIs have mixed usage of 'action' vs 'actions', is there a clear distinction when to use one or other? > Best, > Ori > >>> Flow rules can be updated now without the need to destroy >>> the rule first and create a new one instead. >>> A single API call ensures that no packets are lost by >>> guaranteeing atomicity and flow state correctness. >>> The rte_flow_async_update() is added as well. >>> The matcher is not updated, only the action list is. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kozyrev <akozy...@nvidia.com> >> >> <...>
