Hi Annob, On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 04:16:23PM +0530, Anoob wrote: > On 11/29/2017 06:20 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote: > > Hi Anoob, > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 06:00:38PM +0530, Anoob wrote: > > > Hi Nelio, > > > > > > Since support of RSS with inline crypto/protocol is hardware > > > implementation dependent, it would be better if there is some sort of > > > capability check before setting the flow parameters in the > > > application. > > > > > > If the hardware doesn't support RSS with inline processing, then the > > > RSS > > > flow action will have to be ignored in the driver. This wouldn't look > > > right from application's point of view. And also the PMD would need > > > application-specific logic to handle such cases, which may not scale > > > well. > > There is a real issue here, RTE_FLOW API needs a terminal action, security > > is > > not one [1] you must have one of the followings: QUEUE, DROP, RSS, PF, > > VF or PASSTHRU. > > > > Flow API does not work with "capabilities" as the application can verify > > the rule using the validate(). If it cannot be validated the > > application can test another kind of rule until the PMD returns a > > success. > > > > Here, I am proposing the RSS as RSS with a single queue is equivalent to > > queue. > > > > On Mellanox NIC we need the RSS or QUEUE in ingress and for Egress PASSTHRU > > is good. > > > > What are your needs? > Thanks for the clarification. Understood the issue here. On Cavium hardware > SECURITY will be terminating.
You should finalise with PASSTHRU to be compliant with the API, otherwise application makers won't understand why it does not work according to the API implementation. > So a better approach would be to first check from the application > (using rte_flow_verify()) if SECURITY is terminating action. If it > fails, then application can do RSS/QUEUE. That should solve > the issue. <snip> I think we have an agreement here, in order the final action to be tested: 1. PASSTHRU 2. RSS 3. QUEUE If those 3 fails, the functions fails to create the rule, the first succeeding is the one applied. Do you agree? Thanks, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND
