> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Adrien Mazarguil
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 5:49 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 25/25] doc: describe testpmd flow command
>
> Document syntax, interaction with rte_flow and provide usage examples.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>
>
> ...
>
> +
> +- Check whether a flow rule can be created::
> +
> + flow validate {port_id}
> + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress]
> + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end
> + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end
> +
> +- Create a flow rule::
> +
> + flow create {port_id}
> + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress]
> + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end
> + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end
> +
> +- Destroy specific flow rules::
> +
> + flow destroy {port_id} rule {rule_id} [...]
> +
> +- Destroy all flow rules::
> +
> + flow flush {port_id}
> +
Just a note:
The verbs destroy and flush don't sound right here. Create/destroy are common
verbs pairs for objects but these actions are more like add/remove. I guess the
names come from the underlying APIs which possibly are creating/freeing
objects/structures but maybe they should be called add/remove as well.
And flush generally applies to a pipeline or a queue. The action here is closer
to "remove all".
Probably not worth reworking at this stage if it hasn't bothered anyone else.
> +underlying device in its current state but stops short of creating it.
> +It is bound to ``rte_flow_validate()``::
> +
> + flow validate {port_id}
> + [group {group_id}] [priority {level}] [ingress] [egress]
> + pattern {item} [/ {item} [...]] / end
> + actions {action} [/ {action} [...]] / end
> +
Here and elsewhere the indentation should be the RST standard 3 spaces,
similar to the rest of the doc. This is only worth changing if you
do some other revision of this doc.
Otherwise very good documentation.
Acked-by: John McNamara <john.mcnam...@intel.com>
