[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/2] ethdev: move egress metadata to dynamic field

Andrew Rybchenko arybchenko at solarflare.com
Fri Nov 1 13:34:55 CET 2019


On 10/31/19 7:48 PM, Viacheslav Ovsiienko wrote:
> The dynamic mbuf fields were introduced by [1]. The egress metadata is
> good candidate to be moved from statically allocated field tx_metadata to
> dynamic one. Because mbufs are used in half-duplex fashion only, it is
> safe to share this dynamic field with ingress metadata.
>
> The shared dynamic field contains either egress (if application going to
> transmit mbuf with tx_burst) or ingress (if mbuf is received with rx_burst)
> metadata and can be accessed by RTE_FLOW_DYNF_METADATA() macro or with
> rte_flow_dynf_metadata_set() and rte_flow_dynf_metadata_get() helper
> routines. PKT_TX_DYNF_METADATA/PKT_RX_DYNF_METADATA flag will be set
> along with the data.
>
> The mbuf dynamic field must be registered by calling
> rte_flow_dynf_metadata_register() prior accessing the data.
>
> The availability of dynamic mbuf metadata field can be checked with
> rte_flow_dynf_metadata_avail() routine.
>
> DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MATCH_METADATA offload and configuration flag is removed.
> The metadata support in PMDs is engaged on dynamic field registration.
>
> Metadata feature is getting complex. We might have some set of actions
> and items that might be supported by PMDs in multiple combinations,
> the supported values and masks are the subjects to query by perfroming
> trials (with rte_flow_validate).
>
> [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/62040/
>
> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo at mellanox.com>
> Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika at mellanox.com>

I'm not sure that removal of DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MATCH_METADATA
is a step in right direction, anyway:

Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>



More information about the dev mailing list