From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Lu, Wenzhuo" Subject: Re: [RFC v2] ethdev: introduce generic flow API Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2016 07:00:07 +0000 Message-ID: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09090349C5B4@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <20160705181646.GO7621@6wind.com> <31d00ae664a3aba26a2c703f53bcc6a5b11502b7.1471632644.git.adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Adrien Mazarguil , "dev@dpdk.org" Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C040A6C93 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2016 09:00:11 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <31d00ae664a3aba26a2c703f53bcc6a5b11502b7.1471632644.git.adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi Adrien, Thanks for the V2.=20 May I ask a question that may a little out of the scope here. As currently = we don't store all the flow rules in the driver of Intel NICs, we're trying= to fill this gap. Considering we need to order the flow rules by the prior= ity, I think it's better to introduce avl tree or RB tree or something like= that. We can transplant the avl tree code from FreeBSD. But it doesn't mak= e sense to put it in the PMD. As you mentioned you'll provide some common c= ode in the lib, will you provide avl tree or something similar in the commo= n code? If you have already done it, we need not waste time to do the same = thing again :)