From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1C2160 for ; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 11:46:20 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Oct 2018 02:46:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,356,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="90114092" Received: from kmsmsx156.gar.corp.intel.com ([172.21.138.133]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Oct 2018 02:46:18 -0700 Received: from pgsmsx103.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.13]) by KMSMSX156.gar.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.186]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 8 Oct 2018 17:46:15 +0800 From: "Zhao1, Wei" To: "Zhang, Qi Z" , mocan CC: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" Thread-Topic: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front to jump over ntuple filter case Thread-Index: AQHUVXFXYMbcuuZBIkClVX2dndaqq6UB4x+AgBNEqPA= Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 09:46:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1537249732-7530-1-git-send-email-faicker.mo@ucloud.cn> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532A1A27@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <27452153.f1c7.16614f29e5f.Coremail.faicker.mo@ucloud.cn> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532A6812@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532A6812@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.400.15 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [172.30.20.206] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front to jump over ntuple filter case 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: Mon, 08 Oct 2018 09:46:21 -0000 Hi, =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang, Qi Z > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 7:14 PM > To: mocan ; Zhao1, Wei > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in fro= nt > to jump over ntuple filter case >=20 > OK, got your point. We should not reject a possible valid fdir flow at n-= tuple > flow check stage. >=20 > Review-by: Qi Zhang 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 t= his 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 fdi= r filter ,l2_tn_filter one by one. And aslo, we should code as=20 { 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? >=20 > Thanks > Qi >=20 > From: mocan [mailto:faicker.mo@ucloud.cn] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 4:16 PM > To: Zhang, Qi Z > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re:RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front t= o > jump over ntuple filter case >=20 > 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 filt= er, 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. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > At 2018-09-21 23:48:37, "Zhang, Qi Z" 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 > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/ixgbe: put 5tuple check in front to ju= mp > over > >> ntuple filter case > >> > >> From: "faicker.mo" > >> > >> 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 > >> --- > >> 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 !=3D 0 && > >> + ipv4_mask->hdr.src_addr !=3D UINT32_MAX) || > >> + (ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr !=3D 0 && > >> + ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr !=3D UINT32_MAX) || > >> + (ipv4_mask->hdr.next_proto_id !=3D UINT8_MAX && > >> + ipv4_mask->hdr.next_proto_id !=3D 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 =3D ipv4_mask->hdr.dst_addr; > >> filter->src_ip_mask =3D 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 !=3D 0 && > >> + tcp_mask->hdr.src_port !=3D UINT16_MAX) || > >> + (tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port !=3D 0 && > >> + tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port !=3D 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 =3D tcp_mask->hdr.dst_port; > >> filter->src_port_mask =3D 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 !=3D 0 && > >> + udp_mask->hdr.src_port !=3D UINT16_MAX) || > >> + (udp_mask->hdr.dst_port !=3D 0 && > >> + udp_mask->hdr.dst_port !=3D 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 =3D udp_mask->hdr.dst_port; > >> filter->src_port_mask =3D udp_mask->hdr.src_port; > >> -- > >> 1.8.3.1 > >> > >