From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com (mail-wm0-f66.google.com [74.125.82.66])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AA12BF4
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Wed, 23 May 2018 14:10:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id w194-v6so8285322wmf.2
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Wed, 23 May 2018 05:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references;
bh=vfew0aOB24VUci/GTTjKyFJ0+G8BXe7w9fo3wHJiSoQ=;
b=dUkfvNLI13FT+Pi6/C6JhipGRDnMCC43uGGxSkXS+0eM9vrka7bsnbfYrdvrY5fq6q
R0qRXmR9/TChIXTmKdXHbAyZrmpyNmiiuhaqTA3+Eww5GuZ4x0b3qXjqPFZs2OyY15tE
MeKo/FYG4lg3R+NJgBnCqmce9DQJjC/HL9RHLHjLAEk9BxEeOmwsLk9TF85RbD0Iy/0R
8yuQ6ZtTMe2WSHe4r3JevCjUBGJ86FMtJ11q7VAOVci65ub+4BcHBuRlUipc/lIZKCPx
OkObYHoMfbOiaCdLbHMrfts/5wAhEmu/07h249KG+HclLyRb8R41m7JtFPJLBbLQakzH
Sc8g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to
:references;
bh=vfew0aOB24VUci/GTTjKyFJ0+G8BXe7w9fo3wHJiSoQ=;
b=XuV6qGtbLj737Dnz36pMklZMBMuyxP19D8QiViPKejWGLNVJYgj5mFuMUAsqOjiwQ0
PL9XNsGQcqz4VgGz4GGl0AcKj+q1Of/24/J5qh7ZSG8A0UwRdYSbol0uCcNmgkwiDM+2
9FbMl3r91/LD8dtXSHeyggmvAqn5Anx+xUBu+2xaUZlIXKJSmNBVYHnFfBwXUn+bckOe
ZwPNKchYq/gf5s0pXDlhYMt23DBDXhXeRUTi3Ck2br/3UsYqzi9Mp1RE3Wd9AG94EUom
igmukeyJ2FL2qNzgYJVvSayhwN//ghyhGHpTuAk5CudW0ZATPQtLUROn7+jICBMvHdu3
QxTQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPweZ63I03jbD8bknFdbmDXnBzwXAHzN+9kbpjtHaWYYp1MySGQ2b
X7hYXdqnzyZ8bgwo4oMikf02kzoz
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZqE38/Mb2yb6u10bEFyXRdblenk0HoJB18UMuZ71rWK/sRLeg80WCZ+gF4Wh32ar2DFX/iK7w==
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:7f0a:: with SMTP id
a10-v6mr4639722wmd.97.1527077421110;
Wed, 23 May 2018 05:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([2a00:23c5:be9a:5200:ce4c:82c0:d567:ecbb])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q7-v6sm10631663wrf.0.2018.05.23.05.10.19
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256);
Wed, 23 May 2018 05:10:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: luca.boccassi@gmail.com
To: Ophir Munk <ophirmu@mellanox.com>
Cc: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:09:14 +0100
Message-Id: <20180523121010.8385-3-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.14.2
In-Reply-To: <20180523121010.8385-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
References: <20180516101323.2234-2-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
<20180523121010.8385-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
Subject: [dpdk-stable] patch 'net/tap: fix isolation mode toggling' has been
queued to stable release 18.02.2
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 12:10:21 -0000
Hi,
FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 18.02.2
Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet.
It will be pushed if I get no objections before 05/25/18. So please
shout if anyone has objections.
Thanks.
Luca Boccassi
---
>>From f7b5d10171989dec8a4322594e1d3d8e8790d518 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ophir Munk <ophirmu@mellanox.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 22:26:27 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] net/tap: fix isolation mode toggling
[ upstream commit 2ef1c0da894a9534d41475b8240cff1d04e79fdf ]
Running testpmd command "flow isolae <port> 0" (i.e. disabling flow
isolation) followed by command "flow isolate <port> 1" (i.e. enabling
flow isolation) may result in a TAP error:
PMD: Kernel refused TC filter rule creation (17): File exists
Root cause analysis: when disabling flow isolation we keep the local
rule to redirect packets on TX (TAP_REMOTE_TX index) while we add it
again when enabling flow isolation. As a result this rule is added
two times in a row which results in "File exists" error.
The fix is to identify the "File exists" error and silently ignore it.
Another issue occurs when enabling isolation mode several times in a
row in which case the same tc rules are added consecutively and
rte_flow structs are added to a linked list before removing the
previous rte_flow structs.
The fix is to act upon isolation mode command only when there is a
change from "0" to "1" (or vice versa).
Fixes: f503d2694825 ("net/tap: support flow API isolated mode")
Reviewed-by: Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>
Signed-off-by: Ophir Munk <ophirmu@mellanox.com>
Acked-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
---
drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c | 24 ++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c b/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
index 551b2d83d..84ecf0936 100644
--- a/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
@@ -1545,10 +1545,14 @@ tap_flow_isolate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
{
struct pmd_internals *pmd = dev->data->dev_private;
+ /* normalize 'set' variable to contain 0 or 1 values */
if (set)
- pmd->flow_isolate = 1;
- else
- pmd->flow_isolate = 0;
+ set = 1;
+ /* if already in the right isolation mode - nothing to do */
+ if ((set ^ pmd->flow_isolate) == 0)
+ return 0;
+ /* mark the isolation mode for tap_flow_implicit_create() */
+ pmd->flow_isolate = set;
/*
* If netdevice is there, setup appropriate flow rules immediately.
* Otherwise it will be set when bringing up the netdevice (tun_alloc).
@@ -1556,20 +1560,20 @@ tap_flow_isolate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
if (!pmd->rxq[0].fd)
return 0;
if (set) {
- struct rte_flow *flow;
+ struct rte_flow *remote_flow;
while (1) {
- flow = LIST_FIRST(&pmd->implicit_flows);
- if (!flow)
+ remote_flow = LIST_FIRST(&pmd->implicit_flows);
+ if (!remote_flow)
break;
/*
* Remove all implicit rules on the remote.
* Keep the local rule to redirect packets on TX.
* Keep also the last implicit local rule: ISOLATE.
*/
- if (flow->msg.t.tcm_ifindex == pmd->if_index)
+ if (remote_flow->msg.t.tcm_ifindex == pmd->if_index)
break;
- if (tap_flow_destroy_pmd(pmd, flow, NULL) < 0)
+ if (tap_flow_destroy_pmd(pmd, remote_flow, NULL) < 0)
goto error;
}
/* Switch the TC rule according to pmd->flow_isolate */
@@ -1716,8 +1720,8 @@ int tap_flow_implicit_create(struct pmd_internals *pmd,
}
err = tap_nl_recv_ack(pmd->nlsk_fd);
if (err < 0) {
- /* Silently ignore re-entering remote promiscuous rule */
- if (errno == EEXIST && idx == TAP_REMOTE_PROMISC)
+ /* Silently ignore re-entering existing rule */
+ if (errno == EEXIST)
goto success;
RTE_LOG(ERR, PMD,
"Kernel refused TC filter rule creation (%d): %s\n",
--
2.14.2