Closed satish153 closed 1 year ago
I have some questions about this change. Does it mean we could simply skip the .enable()
calls when using TDI? Or are there other things we should do instead of .enable()
?
For example, currently https://github.com/p4lang/p4-dpdk-target README suggests doing:
bfshell> tdi_python
tdi.<P4 program>.enable()
pipe = tdi.<P4 program>.pipe.ingress
from netaddr import IPAddress
pipe.<P4 table>.<P4 action>(<action parameters>)
eg) pipe.ipv4_lpm.add_with_send(dst_addr=IPAddress('192.168.2.0'),dst_addr_p_length=24, port=1)
After this change, I guess we can just do:
bfshell> tdi_python
pipe = tdi.<P4 program>.pipe.ingress
from netaddr import IPAddress
pipe.<P4 table>.<P4 action>(<action parameters>)
eg) pipe.ipv4_lpm.add_with_send(dst_addr=IPAddress('192.168.2.0'),dst_addr_p_length=24, port=1)
Is this correct?
This PR is to remove the 'enable' command from the common code. The choice to support this command is left to the targets. I see that dpdk target is pointing to tdi older than this commit. So you need to use the 'enable' command.
That clarified my understanding. Thanks @satish153!
Removed enable command as it is not applicable to all the targets.