From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B58622C55 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:37:31 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f9so20834874wmh.0 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:37:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=EgvSBN8jKt2P0e2NpFDovdc/Ewa3qSTBxdMhwoaAdWc=; b=ve8DIWBS7Hsr1gkfU+SI8a/CWmzpfjrPEbOft4Uus6tBwqPvWJG9O5o9REywX/8+XM vRaAL57ZM9jOKKJcHX8t67e9nwjA66380wMj7QxBm2iprPFR89Ol2k5WmvFe5hKXelxN MCbN02kfflpxq8aP8iBD0is4kHLcyrYkWHgwiBhYyHHeM209gH/KIVlApI2yuek1th5g 3I8k6sX232w4VokXCJV4c7SXZOxFoO2LHIULylW5hp4NxiqdB/YJ7AxAF4hm8tMlSluy f4OdAl48zK+O9oRD119yBXgstqJ57YxOogwH1LMtDXf/fj7IsPNVKVJcVFWtucrPSAk0 g4ww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=EgvSBN8jKt2P0e2NpFDovdc/Ewa3qSTBxdMhwoaAdWc=; b=QuGe7hGYfQuweUZSVBtF+C3bcLKh6HbiQ1GHgYxyAFPpOB/gnFA3fthlHVVwab2JUG SdaIyVzPqCtS3lQ19E0445m8yiWn4KEhCL/A9UsD0cLDnk540lyB+7CWPBdGProGLMR3 HMWVssIDoyrN4hfgo2R7rgQ8C1lXE+s1MZyYrT0WrO6nFfqd6FDR8lQ6sV9j5CoShKRD SQnUqO0U7N2P3p3Ry8EuFsYEPFl/eBthP/0NlNg1zC5gbUROo1s7aJoryHVK1iWTXIBA FkhqqkyCh6/2J8Vbak0helM4WUvcexab9kU7RLQw+PmLbFs6YwwIHYL5BkVDOPzYbTXq 7LpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mJ5ctT9uhdb4mQNac2qoNTcdWLiJTJrcEYffFrnv8wB8PRPTHHh 2U+Ktrj3A64iEqUe3xoEY9BmqjhDDQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBou4OOdMnKohZJ+77eYBWgSkoxPqb2YwO6Q/r+uJb3IsCx0fzPv233Dx9HH2O1cB80ykhjjj8A== X-Received: by 10.28.203.197 with SMTP id b188mr1781301wmg.105.1513089451368; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:37:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 26sm20871834wrw.19.2017.12.12.06.37.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:37:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:38:00 +0100 From: Nelio Laranjeiro To: Anoob Joseph Cc: Sergio Gonzalez Monroy , Radu Nicolau , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20171212143800.ggdtdfnbknttr45g@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <5d3fdd0c05d5f8afd3f8e38ca03eaf25187d5c98.1513000931.git.nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com> <5777791b-3dd6-f746-aa37-d572c108f042@caviumnetworks.com> <20171212134456.4x3uaus2poovddlf@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] examples/ipsec-secgw: add target queues in flow actions X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:37:31 -0000 Hi Anoob, On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 07:34:31PM +0530, Anoob Joseph wrote: > Hi Nelio, > > > On 12/12/2017 07:14 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote: > > Hi Anoob, > > > > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:13:08PM +0530, Anoob Joseph wrote: > > > Hi Nelio, > > > > > > > > > On 12/11/2017 07:34 PM, Nelio Laranjeiro wrote: > > > > Mellanox INNOVA NIC needs to have final target queue actions to perform > > > > inline crypto. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nelio Laranjeiro > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > > > > > > * removed PASSTHRU test for ingress. > > > > * removed check on configured queues for the queue action. > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > > > > > * Test the rule by PASSTHRU/RSS/QUEUE and apply the first one validated. > > > > --- > > > > examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > > > examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h | 2 +- > > > > 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c > > > > index 17bd7620d..1b8b251c8 100644 > > > > --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c > > > > +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.c > > > > @@ -142,6 +142,7 @@ create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa) > > > > rte_eth_dev_get_sec_ctx( > > > > sa->portid); > > > > const struct rte_security_capability *sec_cap; > > > > + int ret = 0; > > > > sa->sec_session = rte_security_session_create(ctx, > > > > &sess_conf, ipsec_ctx->session_pool); > > > > @@ -201,15 +202,67 @@ create_session(struct ipsec_ctx *ipsec_ctx, struct ipsec_sa *sa) > > > > sa->action[0].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SECURITY; > > > > sa->action[0].conf = sa->sec_session; > > > > - sa->action[1].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_END; > > > > - > > > > sa->attr.egress = (sa->direction == > > > > RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_DIR_EGRESS); > > > > sa->attr.ingress = (sa->direction == > > > > RTE_SECURITY_IPSEC_SA_DIR_INGRESS); > > > > + if (sa->attr.ingress) { > > > > + uint8_t rss_key[40]; > > > > + struct rte_eth_rss_conf rss_conf = { > > > > + .rss_key = rss_key, > > > > + .rss_key_len = 40, > > > > + }; > > > > + struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev; > > > > + union { > > > > + struct rte_flow_action_rss rss; > > > > + struct { > > > > + const struct rte_eth_rss_conf *rss_conf; > > > > + uint16_t num; > > > > + uint16_t queue[RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT]; > > > > + } local; > > > > + } action_rss; > > > > + unsigned int i; > > > > + unsigned int j; > > > > + > > > > + sa->action[2].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_END; > > > > + /* Try RSS. */ > > > > + sa->action[1].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_RSS; > > > > + sa->action[1].conf = &action_rss; > > > > + eth_dev = ctx->device; > > > > + rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get(sa->portid, > > > > + &rss_conf); > > > > + for (i = 0, j = 0; > > > > + i < eth_dev->data->nb_rx_queues; ++i) > > > > + if (eth_dev->data->rx_queues[i]) > > > > + action_rss.local.queue[j++] = i; > > > > + action_rss.local.num = j; > > > > + action_rss.local.rss_conf = &rss_conf; > > > > + ret = rte_flow_validate(sa->portid, &sa->attr, > > > > + sa->pattern, sa->action, > > > > + &err); > > > > + if (!ret) > > > > + goto flow_create; > > > > + /* Try Queue. */ > > > > + sa->action[1].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_QUEUE; > > > > + sa->action[1].conf = > > > > + &(struct rte_flow_action_queue){ > > > > + .index = 0, > > > > + }; > > > > + ret = rte_flow_validate(sa->portid, &sa->attr, > > > > + sa->pattern, sa->action, > > > > + &err); > > > > + if (ret) > > > > + goto flow_create_failure; > > > > + } else { > > > > + sa->action[1].type = > > > > + RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_PASSTHRU; > > > > + sa->action[2].type = RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_END; > > > We would need flow validate here also. And, for egress, the application will > > > be able to set metadata (set_pkt_metadata API) per packet. So flow may not > > > be required for such cases. But if the flow create fails, the session create > > > would also fail. It might be better if we check whether the PMD would need > > > metadata (part of the sec_cap->ol_flags). > > Seems what you are describing is outside of this scope which is only > > related to correctly implement the generic flow API with terminal > > actions. > Since SECURITY+PASSTHRU won't be terminal, this code segment might be > misleading. Well, I don't mind adding an extra verification even if the create should fail if the validate fails, as there is no other option it is just like adding another if statement considering the validate() cannot guarantee the flow will be created(), other errors like ENOMEM are still possible in the creation stage. > > I'll suggest to add it in another patch. > > > > Anyway, the flow validate is useful in the ingress to select the best > > behavior RSS/Queue, if the flow validate may fail, the flow create > > should also fail for the same reasons. > > > > > If the driver doesn't need metadata and the flow create fails, then > > > the create session should fail. Any thoughts? > > How the create_session() can fail without having all the informations > > (pattern, metadata, ...) the application wants to offload? > Is flow mandatory for the egress traffic? My understanding is, it's not. > "set_pkt_metadata" API gives application the ability to do the lookup and > pass the info along with the packet. In such cases, flow creation is not > necessary. Some NIC need to apply a flow rule for Egress and they don't need metadata for the packet. > I do agree that this is outside the scope of this patch, but I was just > curious about the behavior since you touched the topic. > > > > > > + } > > > > +flow_create: > > > > sa->flow = rte_flow_create(sa->portid, > > > > &sa->attr, sa->pattern, sa->action, &err); > > > > if (sa->flow == NULL) { > > > > +flow_create_failure: > > > > RTE_LOG(ERR, IPSEC, > > > > "Failed to create ipsec flow msg: %s\n", > > > > err.message); > > > > diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h > > > > index 775b316ff..3c367d392 100644 > > > > --- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h > > > > +++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec.h > > > > @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ struct ipsec_sa { > > > > uint32_t ol_flags; > > > > #define MAX_RTE_FLOW_PATTERN (4) > > > > -#define MAX_RTE_FLOW_ACTIONS (2) > > > > +#define MAX_RTE_FLOW_ACTIONS (3) > > > > struct rte_flow_item pattern[MAX_RTE_FLOW_PATTERN]; > > > > struct rte_flow_action action[MAX_RTE_FLOW_ACTIONS]; > > > > struct rte_flow_attr attr; > > Thanks, Regards, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND