Andy Fingerhut

Note that even if bmv2 were enhanced to support it, if you wanted to use P4Runtime API to configure the device, it is not supported by P4Runtime API, either. Of...

It is sometimes necessary for checksum calculations to include TCP or UDP "pseudo headers", which do not actually appear in the packet. These are often stored in metadata fields that...

@usha1830 Here is an example in another p4c test program using metadata and a constant as inputs to a checksum extern for v1model: https://github.com/p4lang/p4c/blob/main/testdata/p4_16_samples/checksum-l4-bmv2.p4#L263

And here is another example using PSA/PNA's incremental checksum, but still has a user-defined metadata field as a parameter: https://github.com/p4lang/p4c/blob/main/testdata/p4_16_samples/psa-example-incremental-checksum.p4#L216

@usha1830 I do not know where this number 0x10EF comes from. Is it part of the packet header contents over which the checksum is being calculated? Something else?

I briefly looked at this, but not deeply enough to understand the root cause fully. For this and several other issues created by the same person, there seem to be...

If such a table definition were legal, applying it would always be a no-op, i.e. execute only NoAction, true? I cannot think of any problem with allowing such a table...

Oh, and for anyone curious, I tried it with latest open source p4c and p4test, and both give a compile-time error that looks like the below if you try to...

I tested this PR, the version after there were 5 commits, on 2022-Feb-26. From the language spec, it gives these two examples in Section 8.23 "Initializing with default values" (https://p4.org/p4-spec/docs/P4-16-v1.2.2.html#sec-initializing-with-default-values):...

@Jovana-Syrmia wrote in an earlier comment: .. and {...} are implemented as ListExpressions. I can add a new variable to distinguish these two expressions and implement it differently when used...