[PATCH v3] app/testpmd: fix protocol header display for Rx buffer split

[Andrew Rybchenko]

On 11/7/22 11:45, Yuan Wang wrote:
> The "show config rxhdrs" cmd displays the configured protocol headers
> that are used for protocol-based buffer split.
> However, it shows inner-ipv6 as inner-ipv4.
> 
> This patch fixes that by adjusting the order of condition judgments.
> This patch also uses RTE_PTYPE_*_MASK as masks.
> 
> Fixes: 52e2e7edcf48 ("app/testpmd: add protocol-based buffer split")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yuan Wang <yuanx.wang at intel.com>
> 
> ---
> v3:
> - use RTE_PTYPE_*_MASK as masks.
> - refactor to use switch statement.
> v2:
> - add fixline.
> 
> ---
>   app/test-pmd/config.c | 89 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>   1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c
> index e8a1b77c2a..8638dfed11 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
> @@ -5070,73 +5070,72 @@ show_rx_pkt_segments(void)
>   
>   static const char *get_ptype_str(uint32_t ptype)
>   {
> -	if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP))
> +	switch (ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_MASK | RTE_PTYPE_L4_MASK)) {
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP:
>   		return "ipv4-tcp";

If I map "ipv4-tcp" to packets types, I get:
RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER | RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP
but vice versa it is sufficient to have just
RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP
I think such asymmetry in mapping is bad.

> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP:
>   		return "ipv4-udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP:
>   		return "ipv4-sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP:
>   		return "ipv6-tcp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP:
>   		return "ipv6-udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP:
>   		return "ipv6-sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP) == RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP:
>   		return "tcp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP) == RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP:
>   		return "udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP) == RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L4_SCTP:
>   		return "sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN) == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN:
>   		return "ipv4";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN) == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN:
>   		return "ipv6";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER) == RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER)
> +	}
> +
> +	switch (ptype & RTE_PTYPE_L2_MASK) {

Having many switches here looks confusing. Who defines
priorities? IMHO it should be single switch here and
values should be in exactly the same order as get_ptype().
Ideally both function should be close to each other.

> +	case RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER:
>   		return "eth";
> +	}
>   
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP))
> -		return "inner-ipv4-tcp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP))
> -		return "inner-ipv4-udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP))
> -		return "inner-ipv4-sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP))
> +	switch (ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_MASK | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_MASK)) {
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP:
>   		return "inner-ipv6-tcp";

get_ptype():
inner-ipv6-tcp -> RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_GRENAT | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L2_ETHER | 
RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP

So, mapping is asymmetric again.

Out of topic for the patch:
Also I'm wondering why inner-ipv6-tcp is a grenat. Why not
VxLAN, not GENEVE?

> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP:
>   		return "inner-ipv6-udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & (RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP)) ==
> -		(RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP))
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP:
>   		return "inner-ipv6-sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP) == RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP:
> +		return "inner-ipv4-tcp";
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP:
> +		return "inner-ipv4-udp";
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN | RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP:
> +		return "inner-ipv4-sctp";
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_TCP:
>   		return "inner-tcp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP) == RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_UDP:
>   		return "inner-udp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP) == RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L4_SCTP:
>   		return "inner-sctp";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN) ==
> -		RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN)
> -		return "inner-ipv4";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN) ==
> -		RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV6_EXT_UNKNOWN:
>   		return "inner-ipv6";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L2_ETHER) == RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L2_ETHER)
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L3_IPV4_EXT_UNKNOWN:
> +		return "inner-ipv4";
> +	}
> +
> +	switch (ptype & RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L2_MASK) {
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_INNER_L2_ETHER:
>   		return "inner-eth";
> -	else if ((ptype & RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_GRENAT) == RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_GRENAT)
> +	}
> +
> +	switch (ptype & RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_MASK) {
> +	case RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_GRENAT:
>   		return "grenat";
> -	else
> -		return "unsupported";
> +	}
> +
> +	return "unsupported";
>   }
>   
>   void