From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f178.google.com (mail-wr0-f178.google.com [209.85.128.178]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6637E200 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 11:32:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr0-f178.google.com with SMTP id x49so16651013wrb.13 for ; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 02:32:21 -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=MIYA631LyidUfpSms2EOHCFblmJHm8zfXouhGr7iZmM=; b=xXdmXenGxS7RwwTKb/laItEL6qSTlPo6p39SWjfmQP2wUwbILQkq74qMbcU7Xf0LPS W51c4TT525JPd8shzrb7igdNMFHpKXQAGN6xztNsH8v8hq6esqWv25xmp/QSJbZAtWZ7 UHXvvf9FWIwVOpQifDKz6eK8RDupo1mFEofdLwziMIcS6zQ65gpE5Gn8CTh/x6rAEBwb uuBqY+oEqIuRilIwO7dt0OhYmL7ymijQxUrBYQAna0RoAGtME+Vg/G0GzJhvgc/0R7A+ DyZWf3A0cCm+OgQNfLdKFFKmH4BxqYPp2fzOC2WYdEguS2wI09406b1LepX3KHWc/TVJ CaoA== 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=MIYA631LyidUfpSms2EOHCFblmJHm8zfXouhGr7iZmM=; b=rfTAOSjwLIqZHQdHhjAEtI0HlrO7CsDwTfNt7NfOgv1+N84oVRhT31tRJLYNHCOzTN LzwZz1ogIVe7jzKnp0iGJ1Zq6pCImabnySdc3yqn0EMOfx+dQxPipBwLFZM7my0ZoeBI qcBY327Tvp4LfZP89cku10ng3EbwsY71Ex8+WFQeLjMnIRySzT3bPv7Lh68oqyhU6jyB 0mxXQ3SjX8NocRVmOB65Ti4k9tcIVi+VaW/UPHg0+XBZLyL84Ii1HP1OTIUwK9g2wNuH pDf6MUAa0owiU0XQKg4vAHt9Qmq/U/N9Zzt1pJWDMtOHLHldYkznECOq8gL5RycWXEXO I/Pw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5pK373Zq2e1UVuKvhwx3hTdaYh38/0YreLiQ6mUkHSe8fKBgta ohdniBJyHQQQpRKw07+tZyjp X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZ+Lr0HM+E/3od2q70Kjr3evAV6CRyM+tFcIRyMedVZWrARnarU6dMkgRSE5lXMrwrqTh8tWg== X-Received: by 10.223.164.20 with SMTP id d20mr12391980wra.103.1512383541154; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 02:32:21 -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 138sm3484628wmf.21.2017.12.04.02.32.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 04 Dec 2017 02:32:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 11:32:32 +0100 From: Nelio Laranjeiro To: "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: Adrien Mazarguil , Thomas Monjalon , "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20171204103232.fvleqatog4r5fjbl@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <20171129173106.120828-2-xuemingl@mellanox.com> <20171203060812.74932-2-xuemingl@mellanox.com> <20171204081056.2rrtocnglat7u4ow@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] [RFC v1 1/5] ethdev: support rss level on tunnel 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, 04 Dec 2017 10:32:21 -0000 Xueming, On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 09:05:22AM +0000, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nelio Laranjeiro [mailto:nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 4:11 PM > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li > > Cc: Adrien Mazarguil ; Thomas Monjalon > > ; dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [RFC v1 1/5] ethdev: support rss level on tunnel > > > > Hi Xueming, > > > > On Sun, Dec 03, 2017 at 02:08:08PM +0800, Xueming Li wrote: > > > There was no RSS hash fields level definition on tunnel, > > > implementations default RSS on tunnel to outer or inner. Adding rss > > > level enable users to specifiy the tunnel level of RSS hash fields. > > > > > > 0: outer most, > > > 1: inner, > > > -1: inner most(PMD auto detection if nested tunnel specified in > > > fields) > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xueming Li > > > --- > > > lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h | 8 ++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > > > index 47c88ea52..41ab91912 100644 > > > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > > > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h > > > @@ -1078,6 +1078,14 @@ struct rte_flow_action_dup { > > > */ > > > struct rte_flow_action_rss { > > > const struct rte_eth_rss_conf *rss_conf; /**< RSS parameters. */ > > > + /** > > > + * RSS on tunnel level: > > > + * 0: outer RSS > > > + * 1: inner RSS > > > + * 2-254: deep inner tunnel level RSS > > > + * -1: inner most level according to flow pattern > > > + */ > > > > Not clear enough, some PMD like MLX5 accept rules starting from the VXLAN > > level, the comment "Inner most level according to flow pattern" > > does not inform inside which tunnel the RSS will be done as this pattern > > does not provide any information related to the position of the tunnel in > > the packet. > > What are the expectation for such situation? > Regarding to supported tunnel types, VXLAN, L3VXLAN, GRE or GENEVE as long > as the PMD supports. RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_MASK is a good mask of supported tunnel > types. Seems you did not understood my question, if I set a flow rule as flow create 0 ingress vxlan / end action rss level -1 queues 0 1 end / end According to your definition: "inner most level according to flow pattern" in my example, the pattern does not provide any "level", this rule can match the first level as the 254th as well, this leads to an undefined situation when using level = -1. What is your expectation in such situation? Thanks, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND