On 4/13/2021 8:53 AM, Ori Kam wrote:
Hi Ferruh,

-----Original Message-----
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>

On 4/11/2021 6:34 PM, Gregory Etelson wrote:
From: Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com>

The integrity item allows the application to match
on the integrity of a packet.

use example:
match that packet integrity checks are ok. The checks depend on
packet layers. For example ICMP packet will not check L4 level.
flow create 0 ingress pattern integrity value mask 0x01 value spec 0x01
match that L4 packet is ok - check L2 & L3 & L4 layers:
flow create 0 ingress pattern integrity value mask 0xfe value spec 0xfe

Signed-off-by: Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getel...@nvidia.com>
---
v2 add testpmd patch
---
   app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 39
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hi Gregory, Ori,

Can you add some samples to "testpmd_funcs.rst#flow-rules-management"?

I asked in some other thread but did not get any response, what do you think to
make 'testpmd_funcs.rst' sample update mandatory when testpmd flow added?

I fully agree that each new function should be mandatory,

What is new function here, new flow API? That should go to flow API documentation, 'rte_flow.rst'.

The question is do we want that each new item / action (they  use existing 
function)
I think it is a bit of overhead but I don't have strong opinion.


Since the documentation is for the testpmd usage sample, I was thinking to add sample for each new item & action indeed. Same of the flow rules not widely used, and it is not always clear how to use them, that is why I believe documenting samples can help.


   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
index fb7a3a8bd3..b5dec34325 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
@@ -289,6 +289,9 @@ enum index {
        ITEM_GENEVE_OPT_TYPE,
        ITEM_GENEVE_OPT_LENGTH,
        ITEM_GENEVE_OPT_DATA,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_LEVEL,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_VALUE,

        /* Validate/create actions. */
        ACTIONS,
@@ -956,6 +959,7 @@ static const enum index next_item[] = {
        ITEM_PFCP,
        ITEM_ECPRI,
        ITEM_GENEVE_OPT,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY,
        END_SET,
        ZERO,
   };
@@ -1307,6 +1311,19 @@ static const enum index item_geneve_opt[] = {
        ZERO,
   };

+static const enum index item_integrity[] = {
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_LEVEL,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_VALUE,
+       ZERO,
+};
+
+static const enum index item_integrity_lv[] = {
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_LEVEL,
+       ITEM_INTEGRITY_VALUE,
+       ITEM_NEXT,
+       ZERO,
+};
+
   static const enum index next_action[] = {
        ACTION_END,
        ACTION_VOID,
@@ -3373,6 +3390,28 @@ static const struct token token_list[] = {
                                (sizeof(struct rte_flow_item_geneve_opt),
                                ITEM_GENEVE_OPT_DATA_SIZE)),
        },
+       [ITEM_INTEGRITY] = {
+               .name = "integrity",
+               .help = "match packet integrity",
+               .priv = PRIV_ITEM(INTEGRITY,
+                                 sizeof(struct rte_flow_item_integrity)),
+               .next = NEXT(item_integrity),
+               .call = parse_vc,
+       },
+       [ITEM_INTEGRITY_LEVEL] = {
+               .name = "level",
+               .help = "integrity level",
+               .next = NEXT(item_integrity_lv, NEXT_ENTRY(UNSIGNED),
+                            item_param),
+               .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY(struct rte_flow_item_integrity,
level)),
+       },
+       [ITEM_INTEGRITY_VALUE] = {
+               .name = "value",
+               .help = "integrity value",
+               .next = NEXT(item_integrity_lv, NEXT_ENTRY(UNSIGNED),
+                            item_param),
+               .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY(struct rte_flow_item_integrity,
value)),
+       },
        /* Validate/create actions. */
        [ACTIONS] = {
                .name = "actions",



Reply via email to