From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-f171.google.com (mail-lb0-f171.google.com [209.85.217.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3811B5949 for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:18:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: by lbbvv8 with SMTP id vv8so23919717lbb.1 for ; Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:18:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=pCYi50Xu8Fl0y6NZdXViJYsn3rPGwpncbD6BHCGXmn8=; b=eD+CFQ0St3Bp2TEBeBLwgqsGF7Q9461eakzqBjwO6rDjR6kC+j1xbl9QXUeaat3iXK YI6sOGWpJwYWb0hs4WDyFpHDaSIVRhxBBERmzeDT/mdsCxc0hHGE8yKxtkLGFpt4aTZL 3SZv/7bggOsXbwrPJu6+dIz5cuzQwpdiTL76JKA/MOfMTldGCzAGRjwR9pcxJ+0FHBSI FdToauR7UfzTzm05fdDP/tmNPNXTQZ+w/RbbIMh9BnrKUlkmYyHLx2kmFyoYoEgqFvbz WDlMKJiWby9zoRU8/u1e059hrvpnDy5GAw/7GUzAevlShSpwSe+eoUypJn7fQtBLtu5M prCg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.27.134 with SMTP id t6mr9861031lag.100.1438787889803; Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:18:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.10.229 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Aug 2015 08:18:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 18:18:09 +0300 Message-ID: From: Vladimir Medvedkin To: Kamraan Nasim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , Jun Du Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Changes to 5tuple IPv4 filters in dpdk v2.0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 15:18:10 -0000 Hi Kam, Flow director can filter by src/dst prefix, but the src/dst prefix length is global for all rules. So, if you decide to specify /16 dst network, all rules will have /16 prefix length for dst address. Regards, Vladimir 2015-08-05 17:53 GMT+03:00 Kamraan Nasim : > Hi Vladimir, > > Thank you for the link. Seems to simply be an abstraction over the > existing filters so it is safe for me to upgrade to v2.0 :) > > Since we are on the subject, are you aware of any filters on 82599 or > Fortville that may provide subnet filtering(I can specify something like > 192.168.0.0/16 instead of host addresses)? What about flow director > filters? > > > --Kam > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Vladimir Medvedkin > wrote: > >> Hi Kam, >> >> 1) The reason is discussed in >> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005179.html >> 2) No, it's still not supported (on current NICs). At the moment ntuple >> is supported only by igb and ixgbe. If you look at >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c you can see ntuple_filter_to_5tuple >> function which translate rte_eth_ntuple_filter to ixgbe_5tuple_filter_info, >> so mask can be either UINT32_MAX or 0. It's hardware limitation (see 82599 >> datasheet 7.1.2.5 L3/L4 5-tuple Filters). >> >> Regards, >> Vladimir >> >> 2015-08-04 23:44 GMT+03:00 Kamraan Nasim : >> >>> Hi DPDK community, >>> >>> I've been using DPDK v1.7 and v1.8 for the past year. On updating to >>> v2.0.0, I see that *rte_5tuple_filter* has been deprecated as well as >>> the >>> associated install/remove call,* rte_eth_dev_add_5tuple_filter()* >>> >>> I now see that rte_eth_ntuple_filter has been added in place. >>> >>> 1) Is there a specific reason for removing backward compatibility? As in >>> is >>> there a known issue with rte_5tuple_filter infra that was discovered in >>> v2.0? >>> >>> >>> 2) One limitation of rte_5tuple_filter was that it could not be used to >>> filter /24 or /16 ip addresses(subnet filtering). I now see that the >>> src_ip_mask and dst_ip_mask is 32 bits and a separate >>> RTE_NTUPLE_FLAGS_SRC_IP >>> < >>> http://dpdk.org/doc/api/rte__eth__ctrl_8h.html#aff1204ca0b33628610956f840dd9b206 >>> > >>> has been introduced. Does this imply that we NOW support subnet >>> filtering(use mask for wildcard masking)? >>> >>> >>> Any help or pointers on the subject will be greatly appreciated!!! >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Kam >>> >> >> >