Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Gregory Etelson]

Hello,

Is this patch scheduled for merge with dpdk.org ?
Please update me.

Regards,
Gregory

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 19:15
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
> <matan@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>;
> stable@dpdk.org; Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>; Wenzhuo Lu
> <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Bernard
> Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop
> 
> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept after port
> stop.
> 
> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was called.
> As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus flow rules.
> 
> Fixes: ce8d561418d4 ("app/testpmd: add port configuration settings")
> 
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
> Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>
> ---
>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
> 7842c3b781..4ba5c41c6e 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> @@ -2627,6 +2627,9 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
>  						RTE_PORT_HANDLING) == 0)
>  			continue;
> 
> +		if (port->flow_list)
> +			port_flow_flush(pi);
> +
>  		rte_eth_dev_stop(pi);
> 
>  		if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(port->port_status),
> --
> 2.25.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 8/20/2020 9:40 AM, Gregory Etelson wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Is this patch scheduled for merge with dpdk.org ?
> Please update me.
> 
> Regards,
> Gregory
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2020 19:15
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
>> <matan@nvidia.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>;
>> stable@dpdk.org; Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>; Wenzhuo Lu
>> <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Bernard
>> Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop
>>
>> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept after port
>> stop.

Hi Gregory, Ori,

Can you please point where this is documented?

>>
>> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was called.
>> As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus flow rules.

There are two issues,

1) According what I see in the rte_flow documentation, not sure if the "port
stop" should clear the rules:
"
PMDs, not applications, are responsible for maintaining flow rules configuration
when stopping and restarting a port or performing other actions which may affect
them. They can only be destroyed explicitly by applications.
"

As I tested with i40e, it keeps the rules after stop/start, cc'ing @Jeff,
@Beilei & @Qi if this is done intentionally.


2) From the perspective of the testers, users of the testpmd. If they are
testing a complex set of filter rules, stopping and starting the port flushing
all rules may be troublesome.
Since there is explicit command to remove a rte_flow rule or to remove them all,
user may prefer to call it when required to delete the rules, instead of this is
done implicitly in port stop.

Btw, this is based on PMD should handle the rules on stop/start, we need to
agree on it first, but even that is not the case, we are in the application
domain now and we can apply the rules back again in the 'start' if it serves
better to the user.


>>
>> Fixes: ce8d561418d4 ("app/testpmd: add port configuration settings")
>>
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
>> Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>
>> ---
>>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
>> 7842c3b781..4ba5c41c6e 100644
>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>> @@ -2627,6 +2627,9 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
>>  						RTE_PORT_HANDLING) == 0)
>>  			continue;
>>
>> +		if (port->flow_list)
>> +			port_flow_flush(pi);
>> +
>>  		rte_eth_dev_stop(pi);
>>
>>  		if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(port->port_status),
>> --
>> 2.25.1
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Ori Kam]

Hi Ferruh,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> 
> On 8/20/2020 9:40 AM, Gregory Etelson wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Is this patch scheduled for merge with dpdk.org ?
> > Please update me.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Gregory
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
> >>
> >> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept after port
> >> stop.
> 
> Hi Gregory, Ori,
> 
> Can you please point where this is documented?
> 
From: rte_ethdev.h
"Please note that some configuration is not stored between calls to
 rte_eth_dev_stop()/rte_eth_dev_start(). The following configuration will
 be retained:

     - MTU
     - flow control settings
     - receive mode configuration (promiscuous mode, all-multicast mode,
       hardware checksum mode, RSS/VMDQ settings etc.)
     - VLAN filtering configuration
     - default MAC address
     - MAC addresses supplied to MAC address array
     - flow director filtering mode (but not filtering rules)
     - NIC queue statistics mappings"

From my understanding this means that flows should not be stored on device stop.


> >>
> >> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was called.
> >> As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus flow rules.
> 
> There are two issues,
> 
> 1) According what I see in the rte_flow documentation, not sure if the "port
> stop" should clear the rules:
> "
> PMDs, not applications, are responsible for maintaining flow rules
> configuration
> when stopping and restarting a port or performing other actions which may
> affect
> them. They can only be destroyed explicitly by applications.
> "
> 
Good catch I think this part should be removed, since it has many issues. The application is the only
one that can be responsible for the rules.

Thinks about the following scenario: application configures 2 queues 0 and 1.
It insert flow with queue action 1.
It stops the port and remove queue 1. What should the PMD do?
What happens if he changed some thing else in configuration that make
the actions invalid?

For those reason (the description in rte_ethdev.h and the above issues with keeping the rules)
we (Mellanox) modified our code to remove the flows in stop function from the device.
This code was inserted to DPDK in 20.05 release.
One more reason is that saving the flows also waste a lot of memory
which is very costly to many applications.


> As I tested with i40e, it keeps the rules after stop/start, cc'ing @Jeff,
> @Beilei & @Qi if this is done intentionally.
> 
> 
> 2) From the perspective of the testers, users of the testpmd. If they are
> testing a complex set of filter rules, stopping and starting the port flushing
> all rules may be troublesome.
> Since there is explicit command to remove a rte_flow rule or to remove them
> all,
> user may prefer to call it when required to delete the rules, instead of this is
> done implicitly in port stop.
> 
> Btw, this is based on PMD should handle the rules on stop/start, we need to
> agree on it first, but even that is not the case, we are in the application
> domain now and we can apply the rules back again in the 'start' if it serves
> better to the user.
> 
First like I said above I think we should agree that it is the application 
responsibility to manage the rules and not the PMD, and first thing to do it
update the rte_flow doc.

Second I agree that we should discuss if test-pmd should keep the rules and reapply them,
but just like for the PMD the user may create invalid configuration, so re-applying the rules
maybe incorrect. 
Currently test-pmd is not build to support large number of rules, unless using a script, and if the user uses a script
he can reuse this script. 



Best,
Ori

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Ori Kam]

Hi Ferruh,
Can we proceed with this patch?

Thanks,
Ori
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ori Kam
> 
> Hi Ferruh,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >
> > On 8/20/2020 9:40 AM, Gregory Etelson wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Is this patch scheduled for merge with dpdk.org ?
> > > Please update me.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Gregory
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
> > >>
> > >> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept after port
> > >> stop.
> >
> > Hi Gregory, Ori,
> >
> > Can you please point where this is documented?
> >
> From: rte_ethdev.h
> "Please note that some configuration is not stored between calls to
>  rte_eth_dev_stop()/rte_eth_dev_start(). The following configuration will
>  be retained:
> 
>      - MTU
>      - flow control settings
>      - receive mode configuration (promiscuous mode, all-multicast mode,
>        hardware checksum mode, RSS/VMDQ settings etc.)
>      - VLAN filtering configuration
>      - default MAC address
>      - MAC addresses supplied to MAC address array
>      - flow director filtering mode (but not filtering rules)
>      - NIC queue statistics mappings"
> 
> From my understanding this means that flows should not be stored on device
> stop.
> 
> 
> > >>
> > >> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was
> called.
> > >> As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus flow rules.
> >
> > There are two issues,
> >
> > 1) According what I see in the rte_flow documentation, not sure if the "port
> > stop" should clear the rules:
> > "
> > PMDs, not applications, are responsible for maintaining flow rules
> > configuration
> > when stopping and restarting a port or performing other actions which may
> > affect
> > them. They can only be destroyed explicitly by applications.
> > "
> >
> Good catch I think this part should be removed, since it has many issues. The
> application is the only
> one that can be responsible for the rules.
> 
> Thinks about the following scenario: application configures 2 queues 0 and 1.
> It insert flow with queue action 1.
> It stops the port and remove queue 1. What should the PMD do?
> What happens if he changed some thing else in configuration that make
> the actions invalid?
> 
> For those reason (the description in rte_ethdev.h and the above issues with
> keeping the rules)
> we (Mellanox) modified our code to remove the flows in stop function from the
> device.
> This code was inserted to DPDK in 20.05 release.
> One more reason is that saving the flows also waste a lot of memory
> which is very costly to many applications.
> 
> 
> > As I tested with i40e, it keeps the rules after stop/start, cc'ing @Jeff,
> > @Beilei & @Qi if this is done intentionally.
> >
> >
> > 2) From the perspective of the testers, users of the testpmd. If they are
> > testing a complex set of filter rules, stopping and starting the port flushing
> > all rules may be troublesome.
> > Since there is explicit command to remove a rte_flow rule or to remove them
> > all,
> > user may prefer to call it when required to delete the rules, instead of this is
> > done implicitly in port stop.
> >
> > Btw, this is based on PMD should handle the rules on stop/start, we need to
> > agree on it first, but even that is not the case, we are in the application
> > domain now and we can apply the rules back again in the 'start' if it serves
> > better to the user.
> >
> First like I said above I think we should agree that it is the application
> responsibility to manage the rules and not the PMD, and first thing to do it
> update the rte_flow doc.
> 
> Second I agree that we should discuss if test-pmd should keep the rules and
> reapply them,
> but just like for the PMD the user may create invalid configuration, so re-
> applying the rules
> maybe incorrect.
> Currently test-pmd is not build to support large number of rules, unless using a
> script, and if the user uses a script
> he can reuse this script.
> 
> 
> 
> Best,
> Ori

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Thomas Monjalon]

13/09/2020 14:12, Ori Kam:
> Hi Ferruh,
> Can we proceed with this patch?

Below, you said "first thing to do it update the rte_flow doc".
So I am expecting a patch on the doc to start this discussion.
This testpmd patch is on hold in my understanding.


> From: Ori Kam
> > From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > > On 8/20/2020 9:40 AM, Gregory Etelson wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Is this patch scheduled for merge with dpdk.org ?
> > > > Please update me.
> > > >
> > > >> From: Gregory Etelson <getelson@mellanox.com>
> > > >>
> > > >> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept after port
> > > >> stop.
> > >
> > > Hi Gregory, Ori,
> > >
> > > Can you please point where this is documented?
> > >
> > From: rte_ethdev.h
> > "Please note that some configuration is not stored between calls to
> >  rte_eth_dev_stop()/rte_eth_dev_start(). The following configuration will
> >  be retained:
> > 
> >      - MTU
> >      - flow control settings
> >      - receive mode configuration (promiscuous mode, all-multicast mode,
> >        hardware checksum mode, RSS/VMDQ settings etc.)
> >      - VLAN filtering configuration
> >      - default MAC address
> >      - MAC addresses supplied to MAC address array
> >      - flow director filtering mode (but not filtering rules)
> >      - NIC queue statistics mappings"
> > 
> > From my understanding this means that flows should not be stored on device
> > stop.
> > 
> > 
> > > >>
> > > >> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was
> > called.
> > > >> As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus flow rules.
> > >
> > > There are two issues,
> > >
> > > 1) According what I see in the rte_flow documentation, not sure if the "port
> > > stop" should clear the rules:
> > > "
> > > PMDs, not applications, are responsible for maintaining flow rules
> > > configuration
> > > when stopping and restarting a port or performing other actions which may
> > > affect
> > > them. They can only be destroyed explicitly by applications.
> > > "
> > >
> > Good catch I think this part should be removed, since it has many issues. The
> > application is the only
> > one that can be responsible for the rules.
> > 
> > Thinks about the following scenario: application configures 2 queues 0 and 1.
> > It insert flow with queue action 1.
> > It stops the port and remove queue 1. What should the PMD do?
> > What happens if he changed some thing else in configuration that make
> > the actions invalid?
> > 
> > For those reason (the description in rte_ethdev.h and the above issues with
> > keeping the rules)
> > we (Mellanox) modified our code to remove the flows in stop function from the
> > device.
> > This code was inserted to DPDK in 20.05 release.
> > One more reason is that saving the flows also waste a lot of memory
> > which is very costly to many applications.
> > 
> > 
> > > As I tested with i40e, it keeps the rules after stop/start, cc'ing @Jeff,
> > > @Beilei & @Qi if this is done intentionally.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2) From the perspective of the testers, users of the testpmd. If they are
> > > testing a complex set of filter rules, stopping and starting the port flushing
> > > all rules may be troublesome.
> > > Since there is explicit command to remove a rte_flow rule or to remove them
> > > all,
> > > user may prefer to call it when required to delete the rules, instead of this is
> > > done implicitly in port stop.
> > >
> > > Btw, this is based on PMD should handle the rules on stop/start, we need to
> > > agree on it first, but even that is not the case, we are in the application
> > > domain now and we can apply the rules back again in the 'start' if it serves
> > > better to the user.
> > >
> > First like I said above I think we should agree that it is the application
> > responsibility to manage the rules and not the PMD, and first thing to do it
> > update the rte_flow doc.
> > 
> > Second I agree that we should discuss if test-pmd should keep the rules and
> > reapply them,
> > but just like for the PMD the user may create invalid configuration, so re-
> > applying the rules
> > maybe incorrect.
> > Currently test-pmd is not build to support large number of rules, unless using a
> > script, and if the user uses a script
> > he can reuse this script.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Gregory Etelson]

Hello,

> 13/09/2020 14:12, Ori Kam:
> > Hi Ferruh,
> > Can we proceed with this patch?
> 
> Below, you said "first thing to do it update the rte_flow doc".
> So I am expecting a patch on the doc to start this discussion.
> This testpmd patch is on hold in my understanding.
> 

Documentation patch "doc: flow rule removal on port stop"
Was sent to the list on September 16. The patch URL is
https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200916111854.1949-1-getelson@nvidia.com/#r

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Thomas Monjalon]

24/11/2020 15:42, Ajit Khaparde:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 11:15 PM Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >
> > According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept
> > after port stop.
> >
> > Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was
> > called. As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus
> > flow rules.
> >
> > Fixes: ce8d561418d4 ("app/testpmd: add port configuration settings")
> >
> > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>

The rte_flow doc is now updated to make clear that flow rules
are not kept after port stop.
This testpmd patch should make clear that the need of flushing
is only for testpmd objects.
The change is postponed to DPDK 21.02.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Ajit Khaparde]

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 11:15 PM Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept
> after port stop.
>
> Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was
> called. As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus
> flow rules.
>
> Fixes: ce8d561418d4 ("app/testpmd: add port configuration settings")
>
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>

Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>

> ---
>  app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> index 7842c3b781..4ba5c41c6e 100644
> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> @@ -2627,6 +2627,9 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
>                                                 RTE_PORT_HANDLING) == 0)
>                         continue;
>
> +               if (port->flow_list)
> +                       port_flow_flush(pi);
> +
>                 rte_eth_dev_stop(pi);
>
>                 if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(port->port_status),
> --
> 2.25.1
>

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: fix flow rules list after port stop

[Gregory Etelson]

According to current RTE API, port flow rules must not be kept
after port stop.

Testpmd did not flush port flow rules after `port stop' command was
called. As the result, after the port was restarted, it showed bogus
flow rules.

Fixes: ce8d561418d4 ("app/testpmd: add port configuration settings")

Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
index 7842c3b781..4ba5c41c6e 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
@@ -2627,6 +2627,9 @@ stop_port(portid_t pid)
 						RTE_PORT_HANDLING) == 0)
 			continue;
 
+		if (port->flow_list)
+			port_flow_flush(pi);
+
 		rte_eth_dev_stop(pi);
 
 		if (rte_atomic16_cmpset(&(port->port_status),
-- 
2.25.1