On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 4:43 AM Luca Vizzarro <luca.vizza...@arm.com> wrote: > > On 30/07/2024 22:33, Jeremy Spewock wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 9:37 AM <jspew...@iol.unh.edu> wrote: > > <snip> > >> +class VerboseOLFlag(Flag): > >> + """Flag representing the OL flags of a packet from Testpmd verbose > >> output.""" > >> + > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_RSS_HASH = auto() > >> + > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN = auto() > >> + > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_IP_CKSUM_GOOD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_IP_CKSUM_BAD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_IP_CKSUM_UNKNOWN = auto() > >> + > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_GOOD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_BAD = auto() > >> + #: > >> + RTE_MBUF_F_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN = auto() > >> + > > After reading more of the API and using this patch to write a test > > suite, I believe there is more expansion of these OL flags that should > > take place. For starters, there are the Tx OL flags that, while not > > seeming to be very useful for the current test suites we are writing, > > wouldn't hurt to also include as they seem to be fairly different. > > Additionally, there are some other less common RX OL flags that should > > be included here just to cover all options. I will work on adding > > these into the next version. > > If you wanted to cover even more, hw_ptype and sw_ptype look like they > could use a data structure. I reckon a flag like the above would also work.
Ack, it's probably worth making those a little more structured as well. >
