From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556B9A00C3; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 12:47:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB8940DFB; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 12:47:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shelob.oktetlabs.ru (shelob.oktetlabs.ru [91.220.146.113]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C115B40695 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 12:47:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.38.17] (aros.oktetlabs.ru [192.168.38.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by shelob.oktetlabs.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF4745A; Mon, 3 Oct 2022 13:47:08 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 shelob.oktetlabs.ru DF4745A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=oktetlabs.ru; s=default; t=1664794029; bh=h4UbJpgG0mZaJZOVFI8WascmlNKjfu1vWPHOoaI88Dk=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=scai32Gl7hLK8xCAV5pJI/5qTLmKr65KxPvtSeRyJ6gA964l9gFfZfIQMZyABfqOV rQlesZXfGTfri6tlcgJTjZoG/5AdLAsT94b7DSFADFbLx9u5KHKP3BBxzP10V1RyNv +8dFASNpHW0AZTPy/iQRP0TfGy8s1qvx08ErY3hg= Message-ID: <2bc61c46-7700-3390-32bb-b0491e9a8766@oktetlabs.ru> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 13:47:08 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ethdev: add send to kernel action To: Ori Kam , Michael Savisko , "dev@dpdk.org" Cc: Slava Ovsiienko , Asaf Penso , Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" , Ferruh Yigit References: <20220919155013.61473-1-michaelsav@nvidia.com> <20220929145445.181369-1-michaelsav@nvidia.com> <52d269fb-5eb4-65f7-dbcc-c4ddecde9492@oktetlabs.ru> Content-Language: en-US From: Andrew Rybchenko Organization: OKTET Labs In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On 10/3/22 12:57, Ori Kam wrote: > Hi Andrew, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrew Rybchenko >> Sent: Monday, 3 October 2022 12:44 >> >> On 10/3/22 11:23, Ori Kam wrote: >>> Hi Andrew >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Andrew Rybchenko >>>> Sent: Monday, 3 October 2022 10:54 >>>> On 9/29/22 17:54, Michael Savisko wrote: >>>>> In some cases application may receive a packet that should have been >>>>> received by the kernel. In this case application uses KNI or other means >>>>> to transfer the packet to the kernel. >>>>> >>>>> With bifurcated driver we can have a rule to route packets matching >>>>> a pattern (example: IPv4 packets) to the DPDK application and the rest >>>>> of the traffic will be received by the kernel. >>>>> But if we want to receive most of the traffic in DPDK except specific >>>>> pattern (example: ICMP packets) that should be processed by the >> kernel, >>>>> then it's easier to re-route these packets with a single rule. >>>>> >>>>> This commit introduces new rte_flow action which allows application to >>>>> re-route packets directly to the kernel without software involvement. >>>>> >>>>> Add new testpmd rte_flow action 'send_to_kernel'. The application >>>>> may use this action to route the packet to the kernel while still >>>>> in the HW. >>>>> >>>>> Example with testpmd command: >>>>> >>>>> flow create 0 ingress priority 0 group 1 pattern eth type spec 0x0800 >>>>> type mask 0xffff / end actions send_to_kernel / end >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Savisko >>>>> Acked-by: Ori Kam >>>>> --- >>>>> v4: >>>>> - improve description comment above >>>> RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SEND_TO_KERNEL >>>>> >>>>> v3: >>>>> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220919155013.61473-1- >>>> michaelsav@nvidia.com/ >>>>> >>>>> v2: >>>>> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20220914093219.11728-1- >>>> michaelsav@nvidia.com/ >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 9 +++++++++ >>>>> doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst | 2 ++ >>>>> lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c | 1 + >>>>> lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h | 12 ++++++++++++ >>>>> 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test- >> pmd/cmdline_flow.c >>>>> index 7f50028eb7..042f6b34a6 100644 >>>>> --- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c >>>>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c >>>>> @@ -612,6 +612,7 @@ enum index { >>>>> ACTION_PORT_REPRESENTOR_PORT_ID, >>>>> ACTION_REPRESENTED_PORT, >>>>> ACTION_REPRESENTED_PORT_ETHDEV_PORT_ID, >>>>> + ACTION_SEND_TO_KERNEL, >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> /** Maximum size for pattern in struct rte_flow_item_raw. */ >>>>> @@ -1872,6 +1873,7 @@ static const enum index next_action[] = { >>>>> ACTION_CONNTRACK_UPDATE, >>>>> ACTION_PORT_REPRESENTOR, >>>>> ACTION_REPRESENTED_PORT, >>>>> + ACTION_SEND_TO_KERNEL, >>>>> ZERO, >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> @@ -6341,6 +6343,13 @@ static const struct token token_list[] = { >>>>> .help = "submit a list of associated actions for red", >>>>> .next = NEXT(next_action), >>>>> }, >>>>> + [ACTION_SEND_TO_KERNEL] = { >>>>> + .name = "send_to_kernel", >>>>> + .help = "send packets to kernel", >>>>> + .priv = PRIV_ACTION(SEND_TO_KERNEL, 0), >>>>> + .next = NEXT(NEXT_ENTRY(ACTION_NEXT)), >>>>> + .call = parse_vc, >>>>> + }, >>>>> >>>>> /* Top-level command. */ >>>>> [ADD] = { >>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst >>>> b/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst >>>>> index 330e34427d..c259c8239a 100644 >>>>> --- a/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst >>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/testpmd_funcs.rst >>>>> @@ -4189,6 +4189,8 @@ This section lists supported actions and their >>>> attributes, if any. >>>>> >>>>> - ``ethdev_port_id {unsigned}``: ethdev port ID >>>>> >>>>> +- ``send_to_kernel``: send packets to kernel. >>>>> + >>>>> Destroying flow rules >>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c >>>>> index 501be9d602..627c671ce4 100644 >>>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c >>>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.c >>>>> @@ -259,6 +259,7 @@ static const struct rte_flow_desc_data >>>> rte_flow_desc_action[] = { >>>>> MK_FLOW_ACTION(CONNTRACK, sizeof(struct >>>> rte_flow_action_conntrack)), >>>>> MK_FLOW_ACTION(PORT_REPRESENTOR, sizeof(struct >>>> rte_flow_action_ethdev)), >>>>> MK_FLOW_ACTION(REPRESENTED_PORT, sizeof(struct >>>> rte_flow_action_ethdev)), >>>>> + MK_FLOW_ACTION(SEND_TO_KERNEL, 0), >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> int >>>>> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>> index a79f1e7ef0..2c15279a3b 100644 >>>>> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h >>>>> @@ -2879,6 +2879,18 @@ enum rte_flow_action_type { >>>>> * @see struct rte_flow_action_ethdev >>>>> */ >>>>> RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_REPRESENTED_PORT, >>>>> + >>>>> + /** >>>>> + * Send packets to the kernel, without going to userspace at all. >>>>> + * The packets will be received by the kernel driver sharing >>>>> + * the same device as the DPDK port on which this action is >>>>> + * configured. This action is mostly suits bifurcated driver >>>>> + * model. >>>>> + * This is an ingress non-transfer action only. >>>> >>>> May be we should not limit the definition to ingress only? >>>> It could be useful on egress as a way to reroute packet >>>> back to kernel. >>>> >>> >>> Interesting, but there are no Kernel queues on egress that can receive >> packets (by definition of egress) >>> do you mean that this will also do loopback from the egress back to the >> ingress of the same port and then >>> send to kernel? >>> if so, I think we need a new action "loop_back" >> >> Yes, I meant intercept packet on egress and send to kernel. >> But we still need loopback+send_to_kernel. Loopback itself >> cannot send to kernel. Moreover it should be two rules: >> loopback on egress plus send-to-kernel on ingress. Does >> it really worse it? I'm not sure. Yes, it sounds a bit >> better from arch point of view, but I'm still unsure. >> I'd allow send-to-kernel on egress. Up to you. >> > > It looks more correct with loop_back on the egress and send-to-kernel on egress > I suggest to keep the current design, > and if we see that we can merge those to commands, we will change it OK. And the last question: do we need to announce it in release notes? Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko > >>> >>>> >>>>> + * >>>>> + * No associated configuration structure. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SEND_TO_KERNEL, >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> /** >>> >