2016-03-09 10:26, Wu, Jingjing: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com] > > 2016-03-09 13:42, Jingjing Wu: > > > struct rte_eth_ipv4_flow { > > > uint32_t src_ip; /**< IPv4 source address to match. */ > > > uint32_t dst_ip; /**< IPv4 destination address to match. */ > > > + uint8_t tos; /**< Type of service to match. */ > > > + uint8_t ttl; /**< Time to live */ > > > + uint8_t proto; > > > > L4 protocol? > > > > > }; > > > > > > /** > > > @@ -443,6 +448,9 @@ struct rte_eth_sctpv4_flow { struct > > > rte_eth_ipv6_flow { > > > uint32_t src_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 source address to match. */ > > > uint32_t dst_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 destination address to match. */ > > > + uint8_t tc; /**< Traffic class to match. */ > > > + uint8_t proto; /**< Protocol, next header. */ > > > + uint8_t hop_limits; > > > }; > > > > Why some fields are not commented? > > I guess the values must be the ones found in the IPv4 header. > > Yes, you are correct. The fields defined in rte_eth_ipvx_flow are the ones in > IP header. > Should I comments all of them?
Please, do I really need to confirm that the API must be clearly documented?
