[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50b370cb-ea52-4fd3-b3b6-5038150762d3@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:38:53 +0100
From: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
To: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...dia.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman
<gal@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, Mark Bloch
<mbloch@...dia.com>, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>, Vlad Dogaru
<vdogaru@...dia.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet
<edumazet@...gle.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 14/15] net/mlx5: HWS, update flow - remove the
use of dual RTCs
On 1/9/25 17:05, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> From: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...dia.com>
>
> This patch is the first part of update flow implementation.
>
> Update flow should support rules with single STE (match STE only),
> as well as rules with multiple STEs (match STE plus action STEs).
>
> Supporting the rules with single STE is straightforward: we just
> overwrite the STE, which is an atomic operation.
> Supporting the rules with action STEs is a more complicated case.
> The existing implementation uses two action RTCs per matcher and
> alternates between the two for each update request.
> This implementation was unnecessarily complex and lead to some
> unhandled edge cases, so the support for rule update with multiple
> STEs wasn't really functional.
>
> This patch removes this code, and the next patch adds implementation
> of a different approach.
>
> Note that after applying this patch and before applying the next
> patch we still have support for update rule with single STE (only
> match STE w/o action STEs), but update will fail for rules with
> action STEs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vlad Dogaru <vdogaru@...dia.com>
> Reviewed-by: Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
What is STE, RTC (and STC from your existing code)?
perhaps not worth a repost, but in general it is much welcomed to
spell out each non obvious acronym once per series.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists