Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front to jump over ntuple filter case

["Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhao1, Wei
> Sent: Monday, October 8, 2018 2:46 AM
> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; mocan <faicker.mo@ucloud.cn>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front
> to jump over ntuple filter case
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zhang, Qi Z
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 7:14 PM
> > To: mocan <faicker.mo@ucloud.cn>; Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in
> > front to jump over ntuple filter case
> >
> > OK, got your point. We should not reject a possible valid fdir flow at
> > n-tuple flow check stage.
> >
> > Review-by: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
> 
> 
> I agree with the point of " We should not reject a possible valid fdir flow at
> n-tuple flow check stage".
> But, I think the fix patch should be more generic for all types filter of this
> problem.
> Maybe, we should delete all " goto out"  in function ixgbe_flow_create().
> Then, it will go to ntuple filter and  ethertype filter, syn filter and fdir
> filter ,l2_tn_filter one by one.
> And aslo, we should code as
> 
> {
> 
> Ntuple:
> ..........
> if(ret)
>     Goto ethertype
> ..........
> 
> Ethertype:
> 
> ..........
> if(ret)
>     Goto fdir filter
> .........
> 
> fdir filter:
> 
> if(ret)
>   Goto l2_tn_filter
> 
> l2_tn_filter:
> 
> .............
> 
> }
> 
> This fix patch only solve the problem of  ntuple and fdir.
> Qi, What do you think of this?

I'm not the author of this part of code, so my understanding of current implementation is:
It assume a flow will not be ambiguous which means if it match to some filter parser (ixgbe_parse_xxx_filter), it is not necessary to match on a different filter.
But I'm not sure if the assumption is correct or not, (this depends on the knowledge of the device capability), 
So do you mean the assumption is not correct? If you think a generic fix is necessary, I have below comments

1. it is better be done by Intel people with enough validation 
2. two options for patch submit.
	Submit a v2 with the generic fix, and it will be captured in this release.
	If it is not urgent, we can just accept current one first, then have a separate patch in next release.

Thanks
Qi
 

> 
> >
> > Thanks
> > Qi
> >
> > From: mocan [mailto:faicker.mo@ucloud.cn]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 4:16 PM
> > To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in
> > front to jump over ntuple filter case
> >
> > Hi Qi,
> > In ixgbe_flow_create function, ntuple filter is parsed first. If the
> > flow is considered to be ntuple filter, it will not go on to judge
> > ethertype filter, syn filter and fdir filter.
> > In the function ntuple_filter_to_5tuple, 5 tuple info is checked, but
> > it's too late to jump over the ntuple filter if it's a fdir filter.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 2018-09-21 23:48:37, "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> > >Hi Faicker:
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of faicker.mo
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 1:49 PM
> > >> To: dev@dpdk.org
> > >> Cc: faicker.mo <faicker.mo@ucloud.cn>
> > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front to
> > >> jump
> > over
> > >> ntuple filter case
> > >>
> > >> From: "faicker.mo" <faicker.mo@ucloud.cn>
> > >>
> > >> Check in func ntuple_filter_to_5tuple is too late for fdir filter
> > >> rule, add
> > check
> > >> in func cons_parse_ntuple_filter.
> > >
> > >Would you explain more about the intention for this patch?
> > >Though it can be more fast to reject an invalid flow, but why it is
> > >too late in
> > your case?
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >Qi
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: faicker.mo <faicker.mo@ucloud.cn>
> > >> ---
> > >>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c | 29
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c
> > b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c
> > >> index 1adf1b8..f0fafeb 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_flow.c
> > >> @@ -363,6 +363,17 @@ const struct rte_flow_action
> > *next_no_void_action(
> > >>  				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >>  			return -rte_errno;
> > >>  		}
> > >> +		if ((ipv4_mask->hdr.src_addr != 0 &&
> > >> +			ipv4_mask->hdr.src_addr != UINT32_MAX) ||
> > >> +			(ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr != 0 &&
> > >> +			ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr != UINT32_MAX) ||
> > >> +			(ipv4_mask->hdr.next_proto_id != UINT8_MAX &&
> > >> +			ipv4_mask->hdr.next_proto_id != 0)) {
> > >> +			rte_flow_error_set(error,
> > >> +				EINVAL, RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> > >> +				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >> +			return -rte_errno;
> > >> +		}
> > >>
> > >>  		filter->dst_ip_mask = ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr;
> > >>  		filter->src_ip_mask = ipv4_mask->hdr.src_addr; @@ -432,6
> > +443,15
> > >> @@ const struct rte_flow_action *next_no_void_action(
> > >>  				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >>  			return -rte_errno;
> > >>  		}
> > >> +		if ((tcp_mask->hdr.src_port != 0 &&
> > >> +			tcp_mask->hdr.src_port != UINT16_MAX) ||
> > >> +			(tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port != 0 &&
> > >> +			tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port != UINT16_MAX)) {
> > >> +			rte_flow_error_set(error,
> > >> +				EINVAL, RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> > >> +				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >> +			return -rte_errno;
> > >> +		}
> > >>
> > >>  		filter->dst_port_mask  = tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port;
> > >>  		filter->src_port_mask  = tcp_mask->hdr.src_port; @@ -467,6
> > >> +487,15 @@ const struct rte_flow_action *next_no_void_action(
> > >>  				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >>  			return -rte_errno;
> > >>  		}
> > >> +		if ((udp_mask->hdr.src_port != 0 &&
> > >> +			udp_mask->hdr.src_port != UINT16_MAX) ||
> > >> +			(udp_mask->hdr.dst_port != 0 &&
> > >> +			udp_mask->hdr.dst_port != UINT16_MAX)) {
> > >> +			rte_flow_error_set(error,
> > >> +				EINVAL, RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> > >> +				item, "Not supported by ntuple filter");
> > >> +			return -rte_errno;
> > >> +		}
> > >>
> > >>  		filter->dst_port_mask = udp_mask->hdr.dst_port;
> > >>  		filter->src_port_mask = udp_mask->hdr.src_port;
> > >> --
> > >> 1.8.3.1
> > >>
> > >