Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Dpdk Backend: Add IPSec support #3858
Dpdk Backend: Add IPSec support #3858
Changes from all commits
755e358
a25ba87
94735b8
dc2ec1a
f1fa910
c3ecad5
82cc98f
fcbd15f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If this header is always to going to present for all dpdk programs, perhaps it should be part of dpdk/pna.p4?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will be only added if ipsec_accelerators enable method is called.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why not use the visitor methods for this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Visitors for Type_Struct and P4Parser? This is for adding the new header and register declarations to the program. Only for placing these new declarations better in the program, I have added check for Type_Struct and Parser.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this could be also done in a visitor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here, we need to insert this set of statements (from lambda function) in deparser. We have the information about which control blocks is/are deparser(s) stored in the "structure". This information is collected in the initial passes while inspecting the program as per specified architecture. Hence, I am checking that while visiting P4Control. I am not able to think of any other way to achieve this here. Please suggest if I am missing something.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this can only happen if someone added a declaration of the extern by hand...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since we are using PNA direction and PNA output port in the code. It is safer to reject any usage of this extern for PSA. I would prefer to keep this check.