From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1094FC7EE2E for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 21:14:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B34740698; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 23:14:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pf1-f179.google.com (mail-pf1-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E704140698 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 23:14:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pf1-f179.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6563ccf5151so5271114b3a.0 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:14:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1686604477; x=1689196477; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=iKxNwtRjsvv+yHh1V3miRIukons9Pc7+Xogh2h6TiTM=; b=sMnagoJVts21XbhpkY6n2pfGwmbFy8aSbQTLRcUO+5oxiP8Wn6JDDROpPxAb/6J52A zs1PzXM6lLiHB+MAEhd6W50x3j/5f3cXNGpva7fdzvpRXWqbnTjysouOLBl5mkmkpCeI 4X+lrpkPBrQaK44xtCjUbIvk47nBFcmDCFXWOda6fbFZ+Nk1z6ojQYvm7khvKJiNgNqD GQU/e1m5Qn9VDsQB2RLfZim10cWm/xWdIViiFHzST2blpyh2Xl7HSnWs7Q+LEft/8R0a A8j9U3Y4RoVQuh9yeMwvSuCYWU6XCxvTn5drb8FIu0Xcy7waEiiZzpQLlAVtsvK++CdD jucw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1686604477; x=1689196477; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iKxNwtRjsvv+yHh1V3miRIukons9Pc7+Xogh2h6TiTM=; b=j+i7tRuX8fNRwVWtz48kRncZPbQTz7OKT74dauviOiJ4BOmII8602CeLk5kFFZb017 J0Q6+c1ba94CqVvtwXqEwrLCH3o4yE/7Anwwbd9J7xOc/MCxhTRZLmC9IsVrB9hlgPSh yMibY+Q4XrpGjND6Lg65JL1iFWF7YXu1JmUCiJu1av+WgwHiUylys+JAyygRVi+GFK/O El6AuZhF/iDiJ6UJ2pChijyfHb6gmb3UtOMv5r4W8vSNM6QvI77Qs0uMd8bIbrpjPCXd caGbak9f6Nfr/7gaY1wAWlLWLIZ1MG6l8jE4W1Q83lud6l5/9Bqsf/ffU3dwuDYo1lwn DUzg== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzVNyJYOYNvsNKIOrxYwY/WSj1CWy5CqitajtqePuXVnPihac2Y +YDituNboOdcF7rE96Qed9EkbA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6E2OpAbqrhk1bZ3Wh7wSet5p/nS0tz/7XkVKRkH8m/bmiWVmfZdY7DpzbukcfpaJvlSRVFAQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:c94:b0:661:a374:767a with SMTP id a20-20020a056a000c9400b00661a374767amr13879068pfv.1.1686604476991; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-120-218.wavecable.com. [204.195.120.218]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b16-20020aa78710000000b00646e7d2b5a7sm7291017pfo.112.2023.06.12.14.14.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 14:14:35 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Sowmini Varadhan Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC V2 0/2] TCP flow classification using 4-tuple and flags Message-ID: <20230612141435.1763784d@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Mon, 13 Jan 2020 18:05:28 +0000 Sowmini Varadhan wrote: > V2 updates: checkpatch fixes, revert accidently spelling error > introduced in V1; > > The problem space of TCP flow tracking and classification > based on TCP state requires the ability to classify TCP > flows on more packet properties than just the 4-tuple, > e.g., TCP flags. This patch-set investigates the set of > changes needed in the examples/flow_classify.c needed to > achieve this. > > Patch 1 extends examples/flow_classify.c to allow constraints > on tcp flags. Patch 2 extends the ACL handling in > librte_flow_classify to include keys on the properties in > addition to the tcp 4-tuple. > > Note that one particular part of this patch-set where feedback > is requested is in allocate_acl_ipv4_tcp_5tuple_rule(): > we need to add a key for the 8 bit flags, but the multibit > trie lookup moves in steps of 4 bytes, so it took some hackery > to figure out what byte-ordering was expected, and there were > no documentation/examples to provide guidelines. Comments/suggestions > would be particularly helpful. > > Sowmini Varadhan (2): > Hooks to allow the setting of filters on tcp flags > Allow the flow_classify example to add an ACL table for tcp. > > examples/flow_classify/flow_classify.c | 121 +++++++++++++++--- > examples/flow_classify/ipv4_rules_file.txt | 22 ++-- > lib/librte_flow_classify/rte_flow_classify.c | 87 +++++++++++++ > lib/librte_flow_classify/rte_flow_classify.h | 19 +++ > .../rte_flow_classify_parse.c | 8 +- > 5 files changed, 230 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > Is anyone still interested in this patch? It would need work for DPDK 23.08 or later code base. For now, marking it as "Changes Requested"