Ben Hutchings wrote:
quoted text > On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 10:54 -0800, Dimitris Michailidis wrote:
>> Ben Hutchings wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 18:24 +0200, Vladislav Zolotarov wrote:
>>>>>> It's a bit worse than that. Currently one can only append filters, not
>>>>>> insert at a given position, as ethtool_rx_ntuple doesn't have an index
>>>>>> field. For devices that use TCAMs, where position matters, it's quite an
>>>>>> obstacle. It also means one cannot modify an existing filter by specifying
>>>>>> a new filter for the same index.
>>>>> It looks like drivers for devices that use TCAMs should implement the
>>>>> RXNFC interface instead.
>>>>>
>>>> Ben, from ethtool manpage it sounds like RXNFC option defines the way
>>>> the RSS hash should be calculated, while SRXNTUPLE is meant to control
>>>> the destination Rx queue for a stream specified by a filter/filters.
>>> By 'RXNFC interface' I mean ETHTOOL_{G,S}RXCLS* and not
>>> ETHTOOL_{G,S}RXFH which wrongly share (part of) the same structure..
>>>
>>>> The
>>>> semantics for a specification of the steam is also quite different. For
>>>> instance, how do u define a rule to drop all packets with source IP
>>>> address 192.168.10.200 by means of RXNFC?
>>> Something like this, I think:
>>>
>>> struct ethtool_rxnfc insert_rule = {
>>> .cmd = ETHTOOL_SRXCLSRLINS,
>>> .flow_type = IP_USER_SPEC,
>>> .fs = {
>>> .flow_type = IP_USER_SPEC,
>>> .h_u.usr_ip4_spec = {
>>> .ip4src = inet_aton("192.168.10.200"),
>>> .ip_ver = ETH_RX_NFC_IP4
>>> },
>>> .m_u.usr_ip4_spec = {
>>> .ip4dst = 0xffffffff,
>>> .l4_4_bytes = 0xffffffff,
>>> .tos = 0xff,
>>> .proto = 0xff
>>> },
>>> .ring_cookie = RX_CLS_FLOW_DISC,
>>> .location = 0,
>>> }
>>> };
>> I think the mask would be 0 for don't care fields and 1 for care, so
>>
>> .m_u.usr_ip4_spec.ip4src = htonl(0xffffffff)
>> .m_u.usr_ip4_spec.ip4dst = htonl(0)
>> etc
>
> That is definitely the opposite of what ixgbe and sfc do for
> ethtool_ntuple_rx_flow_spec, and I believe it is the opposite of what
> niu does for ethtool_rx_flow_spec.
These are the values as our HW at least wants them. The care bits are 1 in
the mask. It's not a huge deal, the driver can complement the masks.
quoted text >
> [...]
>>>> It's also unclear what is the relation between RXNFC and SRXNTUPLE. The
>>>> last in general may override the decision made based on the hash result.
>>>> So, it sounds like applying rules of SRXNTUPLE should come before
>>>> applying the RSS logic and only if there was no match RSS should be
>>>> applied to that frame. Do I get it right?
>>> That's right.
>> It can be more involved than this. Our HW allows a rule to select a
>> different part of the RSS table so you get a filter hit and still do RSS
>> afterwards if you want. Current ethtool interfaces do not support this,
>> basically it would be a different action for either SRXNTUPLE or SRXCLSRLINS.
>
> So does the rule specify an offset added to the output of the RSS hash
> and indirection table, or can it also select a different indirection
> table? Our current hardware also has a filter flag for the former
> behaviour... There are still plenty of bits to spare in 'action' and
> 'ring_cookie' so perhaps we could define a flag for this?
You can partition the indirection table and then a rule can specify that
matching packets should consult region X of the table. The hash value is
not altered, just the part of the overall table it indexes into.
quoted text >
> Ben.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
