From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32741D8E for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 15:59:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f206so8617166wmf.5 for ; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 06:59:58 -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=hbQsar8fAC9yYxZN9NpKQKOAU4YLra4LVMvhoWF35Og=; b=CtaOosXpU10lFY5ca8JcvmhLZVpvJgZ/Aopzg1ZcxEEcnulHqR7FwZkU2KXHKlbRqn ZzqKNAZAE64XT9dXss7SWgHXvTA+abuRp9AnnFpmdOTbbfhwMJou5GU49xSJBlE3sSGP DmSs+0mWycrfXXHMvGJe2Wd2NaAu9kSzTqz9SjISa/v7MDY+XHyleRrdlxETemqgXDmc 8Ge1h97+bYAIEBS0oJEyqKqAPNRnybLAJWP0Tt4ASyAp3UM11/lAiJeR8Goy6YcsE8Jo MjLafqBcOVD20ZQKoaj/6oiAmj6J47sNnmJi29/Gm/R7qT8fpmrSxvYSOhlhnIwUiET6 wsvQ== 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=hbQsar8fAC9yYxZN9NpKQKOAU4YLra4LVMvhoWF35Og=; b=pKrupFqjV87Uvffu94EAvyN8mnT0iz2yT7N/3nmM9NThLUySUO6gUxL7R3AgMiG6BB 0s8QfOjHH1Lacu9Pl3CH0NM3JpyCUNzPTxjDHEQzFg3fi8ro8sXUokkDQ50rRMbtV3tz WmeDJY867K5FKuxMtdzi6VJojkceBCQfsvA/zIzz9uoFdL6+l+BT+ohHdK/n32YKbOXD ssSBgfJw3lj9NWi4lR8+Wb5wbPt50L4C1kLPP2k/E2zzguz4FkZiO22GHD0e4OvvQm1u 8dy0i0Flm7ZOgHruobwB+qOg4UgBItCoE1cyGwC6GGMf3aRnC2uy0A89Co4BCM8KkVUJ Tfxg== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mI79sLbBnu9dRSCldmZ1zmR5i5JuSkYbwsL3suLl6eZ5MdIV6gi 8cC1XuAzKBfa26l48gEs3IfF X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa/zME08ZiVKTljH1WZjpdNIzLDldGx97AEk45/v7s21BmMa6PK7XVSKJwSRf4TgGWIPQxODQ== X-Received: by 10.28.118.4 with SMTP id r4mr7581463wmc.71.1512399598517; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 06:59:58 -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 u194sm8540990wmd.6.2017.12.04.06.59.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 04 Dec 2017 06:59:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 16:00:09 +0100 From: Nelio Laranjeiro To: "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: Adrien Mazarguil , Thomas Monjalon , "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20171204150009.ufxc3uyrorpojre2@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> <20171204103232.fvleqatog4r5fjbl@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 14:59:59 -0000 On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:24:53PM +0000, Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > > > > > > 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? > > > This rule looks a little confused to users, it covers fowling cases? > Vxlan > Gre/vxlan > Vxlan/vxlan/vxlan For my understanding, what I expect from this rule is an RSS spreading on the inner *most* tunnel. If the NIC was recognising at most 4 tunnels in the packet, it would mean RSS on the 4th tunnel, i.e. an equivalent to: vxlan / end actions rss level 4 queues 0 1 end / end > Auto rss level detection will get 1,2,3 for each of above examples from > Pattern in a left to right order, based on what defined in pattern. > Users has to define tunnel pattern one by one exactly. > > Actually we seldom see real requirement beyond inner tunnel, the auto- > detection could be abandoned if it conflict with existing definition. I agree on this last one, if the definition is not clear enough (multiple interpretation in this case), it is better to not expose such functionality. Thanks, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND