Re: [dpdk-dev] Bug in IPACL library of DPDK-1.6.0

[Karmarkar Suyash <skarmarkar@sonusnet.com>]

There are two user defined ACL rules and they are added with just different priority -

1.      And all other fields are wild card:
>       SOURCE IP and  DEST IP = wild card (*)
>       LIF_GRP_INFO_FIELD_IPV6 = wild card (*)
>       PORTS = wild card (*)
2.      Only next header protocol is specified = ICMPv6 (58)
3.      Priority is different. But the one with lower priority is returned during lookup.

The structure is -

enum
{
   NEXT_HDR_FIELD_IPV4, //8
   IPSRC_FIELD_IPV4,  //src ip (32)
   IPDST_FIELD_IPV4,  //dst ip (32)
   PORTS_FIELD_IPV4,  // src port (16) + dest port (16) => 32
   LIF_GRP_INFO_FIELD_IPV4, //lif group (16) +  lif Id (16)  => 32
   ADDR_CTX_FIELD_IPV4, //addr context (32)
   NUM_FIELDS_IPV4
};



struct rte_acl_field_def ipv6_defs[NUM_FIELDS_IPV6] = {
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint8_t),
      .field_index = NEXT_HDR_FIELD_IPV6,
      .input_index = NEXT_HDR_FIELD_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, proto),
   },

///source ip
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPSRC_FIELD0_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPSRC_FIELD0_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, src_addr),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPSRC_FIELD1_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPSRC_FIELD1_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, src_addr) + 1*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPSRC_FIELD2_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPSRC_FIELD2_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, src_addr) + 2*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPSRC_FIELD3_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPSRC_FIELD3_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, src_addr) + 3*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },

///destination ip
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPDST_FIELD0_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPDST_FIELD0_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, dst_addr),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPDST_FIELD1_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPDST_FIELD1_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, dst_addr) + 1*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPDST_FIELD2_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPDST_FIELD2_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, dst_addr) + 2*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = IPDST_FIELD3_IPV6,
      .input_index = IPDST_FIELD3_IPV6,
      .offset = offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, dst_addr) + 3*sizeof (uint32_t),
   },

   ///ports
    {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = PORTS_FIELD_IPV6,
      .input_index = PORTS_FIELD_IPV6,
      .offset = sizeof(struct ipv6_hdr) ,
   },
    //LIF grp and addr ctx
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = LIF_GRP_INFO_FIELD_IPV6,
      .input_index = LIF_GRP_INFO_FIELD_IPV6,
      .offset = sizeof(struct ipv6_hdr) +  sizeof (uint32_t),
   },
   {
      .type = RTE_ACL_FIELD_TYPE_BITMASK,
      .size = sizeof (uint32_t),
      .field_index = ADDR_CTX_FIELD_IPV6,
      .input_index = ADDR_CTX_FIELD_IPV6,
      .offset = sizeof(struct ipv6_hdr) +  2*sizeof (uint32_t),
   }
} ;




-----Original Message-----
From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.ananyev@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 4:16 PM
To: Karmarkar Suyash; dev@dpdk.org
Cc: Dey, Souvik; Patil, PraveenKumar
Subject: RE: Bug in IPACL library of DPDK-1.6.0

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Karmarkar Suyash
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 10:55 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org<mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
> Cc: Dey, Souvik; Patil, PraveenKumar
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Bug in IPACL library of DPDK-1.6.0
>
> Hello All,
>
> If there are two identical IPv6 rules with source and destination IP
> addresses as wild card but with different priority, then during lookup  always the rule that is added first in TRIE is returned even though the second rule that has highest priority.
>

Could you provide a bit more details how to reproduce the problem:
- either a rule and trace file to reproduce the problem in testacl (classsbench) format -or some simple code snippet.

Thanks
Konstantin

> Regards
> Suyash Karmarkar