On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 09:35:29PM +0100, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 3/9/23 14:02, Simon Horman wrote:
> > From: Peng Zhang <[email protected]>
...
> > diff --git a/lib/netdev-offload-provider.h b/lib/netdev-offload-provider.h
> > index 9108856d18d1..7ecbb8d026f1 100644
> > --- a/lib/netdev-offload-provider.h
> > +++ b/lib/netdev-offload-provider.h
> > @@ -102,6 +102,16 @@ struct netdev_flow_api {
> > int (*meter_set)(ofproto_meter_id meter_id,
> > struct ofputil_meter_config *config);
> >
> > + /* Offloads or modifies the offloaded meter on the netdev with the
> > given
> > + * 'meter_id' and the configuration in 'config'. On failure, a non-zero
> > + * error code is returned.
> > + *
> > + * The meter id specified through 'config->meter_id' is converted as an
> > + * internal meter id. */
> > + int (*dpdk_meter_set)(struct netdev *,
> > + ofproto_meter_id meter_id,
> > + struct ofputil_meter_config *);
>
> Hi.
>
> This looks strange. We do already have the meter API here.
> There is no need to create a separate set of APIs for each
> offload provider. This breaks the abstraction.
>
> If there is something missing in existing meter_* callbacks,
> modify them, so they can be suitable for both implementations.
> If you need to iterate over all the ports, we have a special
> netdev_ports_traverse() function that can be used from the
> netdev-offload-dpdk.
Thanks, we are working on revising this accordingly.
> Also, In my reply for v1 I mentioned that this patch set
> should be sent for dpdk-latest branch, not master. i.e.,
> it should have 'dpdk-latest' in the subject prefix.
Sorry about that. This series is based on dpdk-latest.
But I omitted dpdk-latest from the subject prefix.
> CC: Ian.
>
> dpdk-latest branch may need a rebase though. Ian, may I ask
> you to rebase it on the latest master? Or I can do that
> myself, if necessary.
>
> Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
