From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] nfp: extend match and action for flower offload Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:05:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20171009080545.GB11130@netronome.com> References: <1507278086-3102-1-git-send-email-simon.horman@netronome.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Linux Kernel Network Developers , oss-drivers@netronome.com To: Tom Herbert Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]:50913 "EHLO mail-wm0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751661AbdJIIFs (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Oct 2017 04:05:48 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id u138so20003874wmu.5 for ; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 01:05:48 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:34:59AM -0700, Tom Herbert wrote: > Simon, > > Maybe a bit off topic, but I had the impression netronome would > support BPF so that filters could be programmed for arbitrary > protocols and fields. Is that true? If so, what is the relationship > between that functionality and these patches? Hi Tom, you are correct in thinking that Netronome is supporting BPF offload in its nfp driver. That support continues to be enhanced and supported. This patch-set relates to a different set of functionality, offload of the TC flower classifier. At this point there is no relationship between the two sets of functionality and they cannot be used at the same time; different firmware images are required and the driver initiates itself according to the firmware loaded. In future it may be possible to use both BPF and TC flower offloads at the same time but that is not the case at this time. Does that answer your question?