[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMhnp5JE6QPok4nJGGfdP2diEBtA0_9Q2K2OpHJD_Wi-FQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:33:32 +0300
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
Pieter Jansen van Vuuren
<pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/9] nfp: extend flower matching capabilities
On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Simon Horman
<simon.horman@...ronome.com> wrote:
> +nfp_flower_compile_meta_tci(struct nfp_flower_meta_two *frame,
> + struct tc_cls_flower_offload *flow, u8 key_type,
> + bool mask_version)
what's the role of the mask_version flag here and elsewhere in the
sister functions?
> +{
> + struct flow_dissector_key_vlan *flow_vlan;
> + u16 tmp_tci;
> +
> + /* Populate the metadata frame. */
> + frame->nfp_flow_key_layer = key_type;
> + frame->mask_id = ~0;
> +
> + if (mask_version) {
> + frame->tci = cpu_to_be16(~0);
> + return;
> + }
> +
Powered by blists - more mailing lists