> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2016 6:37 PM
> To: Wu, Jingjing
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 01/12] ethdev: extend flow director for
> input selection
>
> 2016-03-09 10:26, Wu, Jingjing:
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
> > > 2016-03-09 13:42, Jingjing Wu:
> > > > struct rte_eth_ipv4_flow {
> > > > uint32_t src_ip; /**< IPv4 source address to match. */
> > > > uint32_t dst_ip; /**< IPv4 destination address to match. */
> > > > + uint8_t tos; /**< Type of service to match. */
> > > > + uint8_t ttl; /**< Time to live */
> > > > + uint8_t proto;
> > >
> > > L4 protocol?
> > >
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > /**
> > > > @@ -443,6 +448,9 @@ struct rte_eth_sctpv4_flow { struct
> > > > rte_eth_ipv6_flow {
> > > > uint32_t src_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 source address to match. */
> > > > uint32_t dst_ip[4]; /**< IPv6 destination address to
> > > > match. */
> > > > + uint8_t tc; /**< Traffic class to match. */
> > > > + uint8_t proto; /**< Protocol, next header. */
> > > > + uint8_t hop_limits;
> > > > };
> > >
> > > Why some fields are not commented?
> > > I guess the values must be the ones found in the IPv4 header.
> >
> > Yes, you are correct. The fields defined in rte_eth_ipvx_flow are the ones
> in IP header.
> > Should I comments all of them?
>
> Please, do I really need to confirm that the API must be clearly documented?
OK. Just asking for your view to avoid meaningless comments. Anyway, will
update.
Thanks
