From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F90D1B3CF for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 17:49:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Oct 2017 08:49:38 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,474,1500966000"; d="scan'208";a="906277046" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.241.224.245]) ([10.241.224.245]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2017 08:49:38 -0700 To: zengganghui , "Doherty, Declan" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: <1504064774-6340-1-git-send-email-zengganghui@huawei.com> <8ae48210-7291-7ee5-a17c-c82f9ed116cd@intel.com> <7683DD995282C14797C50C5AB01DF6D6B8C010@DGGEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com> <2cbd474d-6505-9188-97ae-476a5edb16ef@intel.com> <7683DD995282C14797C50C5AB01DF6D6B8D124@DGGEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com> <029f043f-7e7d-e638-d718-c61e34100e56@intel.com> <7683DD995282C14797C50C5AB01DF6D6B8D84F@DGGEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <972b7ffc-8eb4-86e3-5e80-a57025c00407@intel.com> Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 16:49:37 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7683DD995282C14797C50C5AB01DF6D6B8D84F@DGGEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/bonding: strengthen the judgment of lacp packets 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: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 15:49:42 -0000 On 9/19/2017 5:09 AM, zengganghui wrote: > Local LACP packets do not have VLANs, and ethertype must be ETHER_TYPE_SLOW. But when the PMD supports VLAN strip, you cannot directly determine the ethertype from the packet, but depends on whether the VLAN is stripped. If a VLAN is stripped, then this is not a local LACP packet, but it may be a need to pass through packet. The previous code was not rigorous in determining whether the VLAN was being stripped. > Did I answer your question? Hi Declan, Are you OK with the patch? You already have your ack on patch but discussion was going on... > > BR. > Zeng Ganghui > Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Doherty, Declan [mailto:declan.doherty@intel.com] > Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 9:11 PM > To: zengganghui; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/bonding: strengthen the judgment of lacp packets > > On 18/09/2017 1:50 PM, zengganghui wrote: >> All mbuf packets have been init to zero when pktmbuf pool create. So judgment this flag is safe, whether or not support VLAN stripping. > > Ok, but is there any need to check the ol_flags for PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT or check the vlan_tci at all. I haven't come across anything in the specification which allows LACP links to be formed on top of VLANs but I may be missing something? So if the ethertype is not ETHER_TYPE_SLOW it is irrelevant whether the packet has a VLAN tag or not. > > Also on the basis that you could have LAG groups on top of VLANs, if the NIC doesn't support VLAN stripping/insertion then we would miss all the ingress LACP PDU at the moment now anyway, since the ethertype would be VLAN and not ETHER_TYPE_SLOW, so is_lacp_packet() would always return 0, and we would also fail to encapsulate the LACP PDU in the correct VLAN on egress as that isn't supported in the bonding implementation. > >> >> BR. >> Zeng Ganghui >> Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Doherty, Declan [mailto:declan.doherty@intel.com] >> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 8:34 PM >> To: zengganghui; dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/bonding: strengthen the judgment of lacp >> packets >> >> On 18/09/2017 12:12 PM, zengganghui wrote: >>> For example, when packets received from an MLX network card, the value of mbuf->vlan_tci is a random value. So that this value cannot be used to determine whether VLAN packets . We need to judgment mbuf->ol_flags first. >>> >>> BR. >>> Zeng Ganghui >>> Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Doherty, Declan [mailto:declan.doherty@intel.com] >>> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2017 5:14 PM >>> To: zengganghui; dev@dpdk.org >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/bonding: strengthen the judgment of lacp >>> packets >>> >>> On 30/08/2017 4:46 AM, ZengGanghui wrote: >>>> When the nic does not support vlan rx offload may be wrong, >>>> resulting in lacp packets will not be processed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: ZengGanghui >>>> --- >>> ... >>>> >>> >>> Acked-by: Declan Doherty >>> >> >> Ok, I see your point. A LACP PDU can't be encapsulated in a VLAN packet anyway, as it is link local traffic. So a check for ol_flags & PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT != 0 should be sufficient, otherwise if the PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT flag is true the packet cannot be link local and therefore a LACP PDU. I think that it's safe to assume all PMDs must set this flag if VLAN stripping is enabled? >>