Hi, On 2023/10/10 19:05, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 9/26/2023 12:37 PM, Ori Kam wrote: >> rte_flow supports insert by index table[1]. >> >> Using the above table, the application can create rules >> that are based on hash. >> For example application can create the following logic in order >> to create load balancing: >> 1. Create insert by index table with 2 rules, that hashes based on dmac >> 2. Insert to index 0 a rule that sends the traffic to port A. >> 3. Insert to index 1 a rule that sends the traffic to port B. >> >> Let's also assume that before this table, there is a 5 tuple >> match table that jumps to the above table. >> >> So each packet that matches one of the 5 tuple rules is RSSed >> to port A or B, based on dmac hash. >> >> The issue arises when there is a miss on the 5 tuple table, >> which resulted due to the packet being the first packet of this flow, or >> fragmented packet or any other reason. >> In this case, the application must calculate what would be the >> hash calculated by the HW so it can send the packet to the correct >> port. >> >> This new API allows applications to calculate the hash value of a given >> packet for a given table. >> >> [1] - >> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230208030624.78465-2-akozy...@nvidia.com/ >> >> Signed-off-by: Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com> >> --- >> app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> app/test-pmd/config.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> app/test-pmd/testpmd.h | 2 + >> lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c | 21 +++++++++ >> lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h | 32 ++++++++++++++ >> lib/ethdev/rte_flow_driver.h | 5 +++ >> lib/ethdev/version.map | 1 + >> 7 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > > This is a new rte_flow API but unfortunately there isn't any > review/comment, at least it is experimental API. If there is no > objection/discussion in next few days, I will merge the feature. > > Probably it will be another rte flow feature that only NVIDIA knows and > uses. While mentioned from using, is the driver update for the feature
The hns3 driver support subset of rte_flow, we found the rte_flow feature is very flexible. And its implementation varies according to vendors. Can the rte_flow be standardized ? > planned for this release? > > > Meanwhile, can you please update the documentation, `rte_flow.rst` and > `testpmd_funcs.rst`? > Also can you please rebase on top of latest next-net, this patch > conflicts with merged group set miss action feature. > > . >
