Re: [PATCH v7] ethdev: add special flags when creating async transfer table

From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Rongwei Liu <rongweil@nvidia.com>,
	Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@arknetworks.am>
Cc: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>,
	Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>,
	 Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>,
	Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
	Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>,
	Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
	Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] ethdev: add special flags when creating async transfer table
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 11:12:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1707507.QkHrqEjB74@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d3a0acc3-513-2b36-03-52430327c5a@arknetworks.am>

31/01/2023 06:30, Ivan Malov:
> Hi Rongwei,
> 
> OK, I hear ya. Thanks for persevering.
> 
> I still hope community will comment on the possibility to
> provide a hint mechanism for always-the-same match items,
> with the perspective of becoming more versatile.

Any hint could be imagined.
But please keep this in mind: a hint is *not* a matching criteria,
for the simple reason that a hint can be ignored by the PMD.
So you cannot use a hint to avoid specifying a match item,
but you could use a hint to specify that an item is the same
for all the rules of a table.

> Other
> than that, your current patch might be OK, but, again,
> I think other reviewers' comments (if any) shall
> be addressed. But no strong objections from me.
> 
> By the way, for this "specialise" field, in your opinion,
> which extra flags could emerge in future / would be nice
> to have? I mean, is there any concept of what can be
> added to this field's namespace and what can't be?

I think there is no limit with hint flags to be added.
I repeat it again: hints can be ignored by the PMDs.