Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] net: new ipv6 header extension parsing function

[Akhil Goyal <akhil.goyal@nxp.com>]

Hi Konstantin,

> 
> Hi Akhil,
> 
> >
> > Hi Marcin,
> >
> > >
> > > Introduce new function for IPv6 header extension parsing able to
> > > determine extension length and next protocol number.
> > >
> > > This function is helpful when implementing IPv6 header traversing.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marcin Smoczynski <marcinx.smoczynski@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/librte_net/rte_ip.h | 49
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_net/rte_ip.h b/lib/librte_net/rte_ip.h
> > > index f9b909090..be64da662 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_net/rte_ip.h
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_net/rte_ip.h
> > > @@ -425,6 +425,55 @@ rte_ipv6_udptcp_cksum(const struct ipv6_hdr
> > > *ipv6_hdr, const void *l4_hdr)
> > >  	return (uint16_t)cksum;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +/* IPv6 fragmentation header size */
> > > +#define RTE_IPV6_FRAG_HDR_SIZE 8
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * Parse next IPv6 header extension
> > > + *
> > > + * This function checks if proto number is an IPv6 extensions and parses its
> > > + * data if so, providing information on next header and extension length.
> > > + *
> > > + * @param p
> > > + *   Pointer to an extension raw data.
> > > + * @param proto
> > > + *   Protocol number extracted from the "next header" field from
> > > + *   the IPv6 header or the previous extension.
> > > + * @param ext_len
> > > + *   Extension data length.
> > > + * @return
> > > + *   next protocol number if proto is an IPv6 extension, -EINVAL otherwise
> > > + */
> > > +static inline int __rte_experimental
> >
> >
> > Rte_experimental may not be required for inline functions.
> 
> AFAIK we do need that tag for both inline and non-inline functions,
> till API will be transferred to 'stable' state:
> 
> $ find lib -type f | xargs grep __rte_experimental | grep inline | wc -l
> 57

My first impression was that this API was not exposed. Inline APIs are normally not exposed, 
So I thought rte_experimental is not required. I believe only exposed APIs
Need to be tagged with rte_experimental.

Now since this API is exposed to the application as well, it should have an entry in the .map file.
Otherwise shared build will fail I think for application.

> 
> >
> >
> > > +rte_ipv6_get_next_ext(uint8_t *p, int proto, size_t *ext_len)
> > > +{
> > > +	int next_proto;
> > > +
> > > +	switch (proto) {
> > > +	case IPPROTO_AH:
> > > +		next_proto = *p++;
> > > +		*ext_len = (*p + 2) * sizeof(uint32_t);
> > > +		break;
> > > +
> > > +	case IPPROTO_HOPOPTS:
> > > +	case IPPROTO_ROUTING:
> > > +	case IPPROTO_DSTOPTS:
> > > +		next_proto = *p++;
> > > +		*ext_len = (*p + 1) * sizeof(uint64_t);
> > > +		break;
> > > +
> > > +	case IPPROTO_FRAGMENT:
> > I see that there is some compilation issues with respect to IPPROTO_xxx fields.
> These are reported in patchworks if you need details.
> >
> > Could you please fix these and send next rev.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Akhil