DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Cc: Nithin Dabilpuram <nithind1988@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
	Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>,
	Cristian Dumitrescu <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>,
	Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>,
	John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
	Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
	dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	Krzysztof Kanas <kkanas@marvell.com>,
	Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] mbuf: add Tx offloads for packet marking
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 10:06:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200504080634.GB6327@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALBAE1MeWqShW2O44WD01=vXzrLjMeszFOKPmm86FPxmuY4aSQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 04:48:21PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:53 PM Nithin Dabilpuram
> <nithind1988@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>
> >
> > Introduce PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP, PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN
> > and PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI Tx offload flags to support
> > packet marking.
> >
> > When packet marking feature in Traffic manager is enabled,
> > application has to the use the three new flags to indicate
> > to PMD on whether packet marking needs to be enabled on the
> > specific mbuf or not. By setting the three flags, it is
> > assumed by PMD that application has already verified the
> > applicability of marking on that specific packet and
> > PMD need not perform further checks as per RFC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kanas <kkanas@marvell.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>
> 
> None of the ethdev TM driver implementations has supported packet
> marking support.
> rte_tm and rte_mbuf maintainers(Christian, Oliver), Could you review this patch?

As you know, the number of mbuf flags is limited (only 18 bits are
remaining), so I think we should use them with care, i.e. for features
that are generic enough.

From what I understand, this feature is bound to octeontx2, so using a
mbuf dynamic flag would make more sense here. There are some examples in
dpdk repository, just grep for "dynflag".

Also, I think that the feature availability should be advertised through
an ethdev offload, so an application can know at initialization time
that these flags can be used.

Regards,
Olivier



> 
> 
> > ---
> >  doc/guides/nics/features.rst    | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c      |  6 ++++++
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  3 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
> > index edd21c4..bc978fb 100644
> > --- a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst
> > @@ -913,6 +913,20 @@ Supports to get Rx/Tx packet burst mode information.
> >  * **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``rx_burst_mode_get``, ``tx_burst_mode_get``.
> >  * **[related] API**: ``rte_eth_rx_burst_mode_get()``, ``rte_eth_tx_burst_mode_get()``.
> >
> > +.. _nic_features_traffic_manager_packet_marking_offload:
> > +
> > +Traffic Manager Packet marking offload
> > +--------------------------------------
> > +
> > +Supports enabling a packet marking offload specific mbuf.
> > +
> > +* **[uses]     mbuf**: ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP``,
> > +  ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN``, ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI``,
> > +  ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_IPV4``, ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_IPV6``.
> > +* **[uses]     mbuf**: ``mbuf.l2_len``.
> > +* **[related] API**: ``rte_tm_mark_ip_dscp()``, ``rte_tm_mark_ip_ecn()``,
> > +  ``rte_tm_mark_vlan_dei()``.
> > +
> >  .. _nic_features_other:
> >
> >  Other dev ops not represented by a Feature
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
> > index cd5794d..5c6896d 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
> > @@ -880,6 +880,9 @@ const char *rte_get_tx_ol_flag_name(uint64_t mask)
> >         case PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD: return "PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD";
> >         case PKT_TX_UDP_SEG: return "PKT_TX_UDP_SEG";
> >         case PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM: return "PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM";
> > +       case PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI: return "PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI";
> > +       case PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP: return "PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP";
> > +       case PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN: return "PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN";
> >         default: return NULL;
> >         }
> >  }
> > @@ -916,6 +919,9 @@ rte_get_tx_ol_flag_list(uint64_t mask, char *buf, size_t buflen)
> >                 { PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD, PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD, NULL },
> >                 { PKT_TX_UDP_SEG, PKT_TX_UDP_SEG, NULL },
> >                 { PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM, NULL },
> > +               { PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI, PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI, NULL },
> > +               { PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP, PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP, NULL },
> > +               { PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN, PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN, NULL },
> >         };
> >         const char *name;
> >         unsigned int i;
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> > index b9a59c8..d9f1290 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> > @@ -187,11 +187,40 @@ extern "C" {
> >  /* add new RX flags here, don't forget to update PKT_FIRST_FREE */
> >
> >  #define PKT_FIRST_FREE (1ULL << 23)
> > -#define PKT_LAST_FREE (1ULL << 40)
> > +#define PKT_LAST_FREE (1ULL << 37)
> >
> >  /* add new TX flags here, don't forget to update PKT_LAST_FREE  */
> >
> >  /**
> > + * Packet marking offload flags. These flags indicated what kind
> > + * of packet marking needs to be applied on a given mbuf when
> > + * appropriate Traffic Manager configuration is in place.
> > + * When user set's these flags on a mbuf, below assumptions are made
> > + * 1) When PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI is set,
> > + * a) PMD assumes pkt to be a 802.1q packet.
> > + * b) Application should also set mbuf.l2_len where 802.1Q header is
> > + *    at (mbuf.l2_len - 6) offset.
> > + * 2) When PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP is set,
> > + * a) Application should also set either PKT_TX_IPV4 or PKT_TX_IPV6
> > + *    to indicate whether if it is IPv4 packet or IPv6 packet
> > + *    for DSCP marking. It should also set PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM if it is
> > + *    IPv4 pkt.
> > + * b) Application should also set mbuf.l2_len that indicates
> > + *    start offset of L3 header.
> > + * 3) When PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN is set,
> > + * a) Application should also set either PKT_TX_IPV4 or PKT_TX_IPV6.
> > + *    It should also set PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM if it is IPv4 pkt.
> > + * b) PMD will assume pkt L4 protocol is either TCP or SCTP and
> > + *    ECN is set to 2'b01 or 2'b10 as per RFC 3168 and hence HW
> > + *    can mark the packet for a configured color.
> > + * c) Application should also set mbuf.l2_len that indicates
> > + *    start offset of L3 header.
> > + */
> > +#define PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI           (1ULL << 38)
> > +#define PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP            (1ULL << 39)
> > +#define PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN             (1ULL << 40)
> > +
> > +/**
> >   * Outer UDP checksum offload flag. This flag is used for enabling
> >   * outer UDP checksum in PMD. To use outer UDP checksum, the user needs to
> >   * 1) Enable the following in mbuf,
> > @@ -384,7 +413,10 @@ extern "C" {
> >                 PKT_TX_MACSEC |          \
> >                 PKT_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD |     \
> >                 PKT_TX_UDP_SEG |         \
> > -               PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM)
> > +               PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM | \
> > +               PKT_TX_MARK_VLAN_DEI |   \
> > +               PKT_TX_MARK_IP_DSCP |    \
> > +               PKT_TX_MARK_IP_ECN)
> >
> >  /**
> >   * Mbuf having an external buffer attached. shinfo in mbuf must be filled.
> > --
> > 2.8.4
> >

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-04  8:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-17  7:22 Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-17  7:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/octeontx2: add tm packet marking cb Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-17  7:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] net/octeontx2: add Tx packet marking offload support Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-01 11:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] mbuf: add Tx offloads for packet marking Jerin Jacob
2020-05-04  8:06   ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2020-05-04  8:27     ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-04  9:16       ` Olivier Matz
2020-05-04 10:04         ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-04 12:27           ` Olivier Matz
2020-05-05  6:19             ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-13 12:28               ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-14 20:29               ` Olivier Matz
2020-05-15 10:08                 ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-15 10:30                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-05-15 13:57                     ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-28 15:43                       ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-30 15:12                         ` Jerin Jacob
2020-06-02 10:53                           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-06-02 14:25                             ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-06-03  8:28                               ` Olivier Matz
2020-06-03 10:44                                 ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-06-03 11:38                                   ` Olivier Matz
2020-06-03 12:52                                     ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-06-03 16:14                                       ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-06-08  9:39                                         ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-06-03 14:56                                     ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-06-03 10:31                               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-05-15 13:12                   ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-15 13:44                     ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-05-15 15:10                       ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-15 16:26                         ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-15 16:52                           ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-15 17:00                             ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-15 18:07                             ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2023-07-31 12:54 ` [dpdk-dev] " Thomas Monjalon
2023-08-14  8:11   ` Nithin Dabilpuram

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200504080634.GB6327@platinum \
    --to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
    --cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
    --cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
    --cc=kkanas@marvell.com \
    --cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
    --cc=ndabilpuram@marvell.com \
    --cc=nithind1988@gmail.com \
    --cc=orika@mellanox.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).