On 1/6/26 11:32 AM, Dumitru Ceara wrote: > On 1/5/26 4:51 PM, Ilya Maximets wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/lib/meta-flow.xml b/lib/meta-flow.xml >>>>> index 5c57ab08ff18..c996cddad341 100644 >>>>> --- a/lib/meta-flow.xml >>>>> +++ b/lib/meta-flow.xml >>>>> @@ -2905,7 +2905,8 @@ actions=clone(load:0->NXM_OF_IN_PORT[],output:123) >>>>> This is the first of several Open vSwitch registers, all of which >>>>> have >>>>> the same properties. Open vSwitch 1.1 introduced registers 0, 1, >>>>> 2, and >>>>> 3, version 1.3 added register 4, version 1.7 added registers 5, 6, >>>>> and 7, >>>>> - and version 2.6 added registers 8 through 15. >>>>> + version 2.6 added registers 8 through 15 and version 3.7 added >>>>> registers >>>>> + 16 through 31. >>>>> </field> >>>>> <!-- XXX series --> >>>>> <field id="MFF_REG1" title="Register 1" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> @@ -2923,6 +2924,22 @@ actions=clone(load:0->NXM_OF_IN_PORT[],output:123) >>>>> <field id="MFF_REG13" title="Register 13" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> <field id="MFF_REG14" title="Register 14" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> <field id="MFF_REG15" title="Register 15" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG16" title="Register 16" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG17" title="Register 17" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG18" title="Register 18" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG19" title="Register 19" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG20" title="Register 20" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG21" title="Register 21" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG22" title="Register 22" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG23" title="Register 23" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG24" title="Register 24" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG25" title="Register 25" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG26" title="Register 26" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG27" title="Register 27" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG28" title="Register 28" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG29" title="Register 29" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG30" title="Register 30" hidden="yes"/> >>>>> + <field id="MFF_REG31" title="Register 31" hidden="yes"/> >>>> The ovs-fields man page shows the REG0 as an exmaple, we probably need to >>>> mention that new registers have a different class somehow, either by >>>> showing >>>> another example, or at least just stating what is the other class and for >>>> which registers it is getting used. Same for the xxregs. >>>> >>> Would something like this work for you (I added a line to each type of >>> register, including XREGs and XXREGs): >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/meta-flow.xml b/lib/meta-flow.xml >>> index c996cddad341..ca6394b0685f 100644 >>> --- a/lib/meta-flow.xml >>> +++ b/lib/meta-flow.xml >>> @@ -2902,11 +2902,19 @@ actions=clone(load:0->NXM_OF_IN_PORT[],output:123) >>> </field> >>> >>> <field id="MFF_REG0" title="Register 0"> >>> - This is the first of several Open vSwitch registers, all of which >>> have >>> - the same properties. Open vSwitch 1.1 introduced registers 0, 1, 2, >>> and >>> - 3, version 1.3 added register 4, version 1.7 added registers 5, 6, >>> and 7, >>> - version 2.6 added registers 8 through 15 and version 3.7 added >>> registers >>> - 16 through 31. >>> + <p> >>> + This is the first of several Open vSwitch registers, all of which >>> have >>> + the same properties. Open vSwitch 1.1 introduced registers 0, 1, >>> 2, >>> + and 3, version 1.3 added register 4, version 1.7 added registers >>> 5, 6, >>> + and 7, version 2.6 added registers 8 through 15 and version 3.7 >>> added >> nit: Missed the last time, but the oxford comma before the final 'and' seems >> like something we should preserve. >> > > I didn't even notice the comma it before you mentioned it. :) > > I'll re-add it and I'll also use it in the extended registers section. > >>> + registers 16 through 31. >>> + </p> >>> + >>> + <p> >>> + Registers 0 through 15 are defined using OXM the >> "using OXM the" ? Sounds strange. >> >>> + <code>OFPXMC_NXM_1</code> class while registers 16 through 31 are >>> + defined using the OXM <code>OFPXMC_EXPERIMENTER</code> class. >> I think, it may be less confusing if we talk here in terms of code point >> prefixes instead of OXM classes. Since we document OXM/NXM code points >> here and 32-bit registers do not have OXM code points, mentioning the OXM >> class may be hard to follow. Also, OFPXMC_EXPERIMENTER doesn't specify >> which experimenter class is being used. >> >> Maybe something like "Code points for registers 0 through 15 are defined >> within NXM_NX code point prefix, while regitsters 16 through 31 are >> defined within NXOXM_ET, due to limited space within the NXM_NX class."
One more thing here is maybe good to point out the first NXOXM_ET version including the number inside the class, since they do not start with a zero, e.g.: "... while registers 16 through 31 are defined within NXOXM_ET starting with NXOXM_ET_REG16 (17), due to ..." The docs seem a little more complete this way. Not sure. >> >> What do you think? >> > > Way better. > >> >>> + </p> >>> </field> >>> <!-- XXX series --> >>> <field id="MFF_REG1" title="Register 1" hidden="yes"/> >>> @@ -2952,6 +2960,11 @@ actions=clone(load:0->NXM_OF_IN_PORT[],output:123) >>> 2.6 and later) or 16 (in version 3.7 and later). >>> </p> >>> >>> + <p> >>> + The registers are defined using OXM the <code>OFPXMC_NXM_1</code> >> This should be OFPXMC_PACKET_REGS instead. But anyways, the comment >> above applies here as well. Maybe something like: >> >> "Code points for all of the extended registers are defined within >> OXM_OF_PKT_REG code point prefix." >> >>> + class. >>> + </p> >>> + >>> <p> >>> Each of the 64-bit extended registers overlays two of the 32-bit >>> registers: <code>xreg0</code> overlays <code>reg0</code> and >>> @@ -2999,6 +3012,12 @@ actions=clone(load:0->NXM_OF_IN_PORT[],output:123) >>> vSwitch 4 128-bit registers (in versions 2.6 and later) and 8 >>> (in version 3.7 and later). >>> </p> >>> + >>> + <p> >>> + Registers 0 through 3 are defined using OXM the >>> + <code>OFPXMC_NXM_1</code> class while registers 4 through 7 are >>> + defined using the OXM <code>OFPXMC_EXPERIMENTER</code> class. >>> + </p> >> "Code points for double-extended registers 0 through 3 ..." > > Cool, I'll update the wording in v2. > > Thanks, > Dumitru > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
