On 8/2/2017 2:41 PM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote: > Hi Wenzhuo, > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 01:00:47PM +0000, Lu, Wenzhuo wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Zhao1, Wei >>> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 3:28 AM >>> To: TETSURO NAKAMURA <nakamura.tets...@lab.ntt.co.jp> >>> Cc: TAKADA Naoki <takada.na...@lab.ntt.co.jp>; Satoshi NISHIYAMA >>> <nishiyam...@lab.ntt.co.jp>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; >>> firstname.lastname@example.org >>> Subject: RE: using rte_flow via tespmd with Intel X552 >>> >>> Hi, NAKAMURA >>> >>> I have upload 2 documents about command format when creating flow for >>> NIC igb and ixgbe in the email attachment. >>> I have decided to commit the context in the doc to doc\guides\nics\ixgbe.rst >>> before, BUT by now it seems the content of the document is too much To >>> store there. So, is there any other doc more suitable in DPDK to record >>> this. >>> And welcome for any other suggestion. >>> AND, Wenzhuo, what is your opinion for this? >> I also have the same feeling that it may make the ixgbe.rst too big. >> + John and Adrien. Hi John, Adrien, I'm think about creating a specific doc >> for rte flow, we can include the examples for every NIC here. Is it good? If >> so, where's the good place to put it? Thanks. > > Depends on the kind of examples. Code samples or testpmd flow command? > Unless you mean a document that describes individual rte_flow features > supported by each NIC? > > Code samples could be added to a new "Programming flow rules" (or something) > section in doc/guide/prog_guide/rte_flow.rst. > > Another section about NICs could be added in that documentation as well but > should only contain a short summary for each of them and a link to the > relevant PMD documentation in nics/$PMD.rst (or elsewhere in the DPDK > tree), if any. > > If you want to describe individual rte_flow features supported by each NIC, > I think there's no other choice but to create a bunch of > doc/guides/nics/features/rte_flow/*.ini files.
Indeed I was thinking doing a change in .ini files related rte flow in 17.11 rte_flow is a method to implement some filtering features, rte_flow itself is not a device feature. And filtering features already listed in .ini file. So I was thinking removing rte_flow from feature table, and update existing filter features as something like: "Ethertype filter = L" --> Feature exist and implemented using Legacy method. "Ethertype filter = Y" --> Feature exist and implemented using rte flow Does it make sense? > >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: TETSURO NAKAMURA [mailto:nakamura.tets...@lab.ntt.co.jp] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 12:22 PM >>>> To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zh...@intel.com> >>>> Cc: TAKADA Naoki <takada.na...@lab.ntt.co.jp>; Satoshi NISHIYAMA >>>> <nishiyam...@lab.ntt.co.jp>; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo...@intel.com>; >>>> email@example.com >>>> Subject: Re: using rte_flow via tespmd with Intel X552 >>>> >>>> Wei Zhao - san >>>> (Cc'ing Wenzhuo - san) >>>> >>>> According to the e-mail thread  in April, you have a document about >>>> command format when creating flows on ixgbe NIC. >>>> >>>> I would appreciate your uploading that document to community or could >>>> you just share it with me via an e-mail ?? >>>> >>>>  http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/users/2017-April/001786.html >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Tetsuro >>>> >>>> # re-sending the e-mail because I failed to submit the e-mail to >>>> us...@dpdk.org. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Tetsuro Nakamura <nakamura.tets...@lab.ntt.co.jp> NTT Network Service >>>> Systems Laboratories >>>> TEL:0422 59 6914(National)/+81 422 59 6914(International) 3-9-11, >>>> Midori-Cho Musashino-Shi, Tokyo 180-8585 Japan >>>> >> >