DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
	 Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>,
	Bernard Iremonger <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>,
	Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: support age shared action context
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:28:09 +0000
Message-ID: <MW2PR12MB2492691971F3A4EB25A1D20BDFEF0@MW2PR12MB2492.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0af253e4-74cf-61ab-124e-6d873474a113@intel.com>



 From: Ferruh Yigit
> On 11/3/2020 7:33 AM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> > Hi Ferruh
> >
> > Thank you for the fast review.
> > Please see inline
> >
> > From: Ferruh Yigit
> >> On 11/1/2020 5:48 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> >>> When an age action becomes aged-out the rte_flow_get_aged_flows
> >>> should return the action context supplied by the configuration structure.
> >>>
> >>> In case the age action created by the shared action API, the shared
> >>> action context of the Testpmd application was not set.
> >>>
> >>> In addition, the application handler of the contexts returned by the
> >>> rte_flow_get_aged_flows API didn't consider the fact that the action
> >>> could be set by the shared action API and considered it as regular
> >>> flow context.
> >>>
> >>> This caused a crash in Testpmd when the context is parsed.
> >>>
> >>> This patch set context type in the flow and shared action context
> >>> and uses it to parse the aged-out contexts correctly.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>
> >>> Acked-by: Dekel Peled <dekelp@nvidia.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    app/test-pmd/config.c  | 57
> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >> ---------
> >>>    app/test-pmd/testpmd.h |  7 +++++++
> >>>    2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c index
> >>> e0203f0..3581f3d 100644
> >>> --- a/app/test-pmd/config.c
> >>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c
> >>> @@ -1665,8 +1665,10 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t
> >>> port_id,
> >> const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
> >>>                return NULL;
> >>>        }
> >>>        if (rte_flow_conv(RTE_FLOW_CONV_OP_RULE, &pf->rule, ret, &rule,
> >>> -                       error) >= 0)
> >>> +                       error) >= 0) {
> >>> +             pf->ctype = CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW;
> >>>                return pf;
> >>> +     }
> >>>        free(pf);
> >>>        return NULL;
> >>>    }
> >>> @@ -1831,6 +1833,7 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t port_id,
> >> const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
> >>>        }
> >>>        psa->next = *ppsa;
> >>>        psa->id = id;
> >>> +     psa->ctype = CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION;
> >>>        *ppsa = psa;
> >>>        *action = psa;
> >>>        return 0;
> >>> @@ -1849,6 +1852,12 @@ void port_flow_tunnel_create(portid_t
> >>> port_id,
> >> const struct tunnel_ops *ops)
> >>>        ret = action_alloc(port_id, id, &psa);
> >>>        if (ret)
> >>>                return ret;
> >>> +     if (action->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_AGE) {
> >>> +             struct rte_flow_action_age *age =
> >>> +                             (void *)(uintptr_t)(action->conf);
> >>> +
> >>> +             age->context = psa;
> >>> +     }
> >>
> >> The port flow is using 'update_age_action_context()' function, can
> >> same function be utilized to update age context for shared action too?
> >
> > For updating flow context, the code iterates all actions to find the age action -
> so it worth to call dedicate function.
> > For updating  shared action context - it a direct access.
> > So, they have different search method.
> >
> 
> Just to reduce the age action related churn in the code, if it can be abstracted
> in to a single function I prefer it, if that doesn't make sense it is OK.
> 
> >
> >>
> >> btw, not sure why 'update_age_action_context()' is not static, if you
> >> will touch it can you please make it static function?
> >>
> >> And overall this context setting for the age action is requiring the
> >> special conditions in the flow create path, can you please check if
> >> it can be moved to 'cmdline_flow.c' for age parsing code somehow?
> >>
> >>>        /* Poisoning to make sure PMDs update it in case of error. */
> >>>        memset(&error, 0x22, sizeof(error));
> >>>        psa->action = rte_flow_shared_action_create(port_id, conf,
> >>> action, @@ -2379,7 +2388,10 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
> >>>        void **contexts;
> >>>        int nb_context, total = 0, idx;
> >>>        struct rte_flow_error error;
> >>> -     struct port_flow *pf;
> >>> +     union {
> >>> +             struct port_flow *pf;
> >>> +             struct port_shared_action *psa;
> >>> +     } ctx;
> >>>
> >>>        if (port_id_is_invalid(port_id, ENABLED_WARN) ||
> >>>            port_id == (portid_t)RTE_PORT_ALL) @@ -2397,7 +2409,7 @@
> >>> struct rte_flow_shared_action *
> >>>                printf("Cannot allocate contexts for aged flow\n");
> >>>                return;
> >>>        }
> >>> -     printf("ID\tGroup\tPrio\tAttr\n");
> >>> +     printf("%-20s\tID\tGroup\tPrio\tAttr\n", "Type");
> >>>        nb_context = rte_flow_get_aged_flows(port_id, contexts, total,
> &error);
> >>>        if (nb_context != total) {
> >>>                printf("Port:%d get aged flows count(%d) !=
> >>> total(%d)\n", @@ -2406,18 +2418,31 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
> >>>                return;
> >>>        }
> >>>        for (idx = 0; idx < nb_context; idx++) {
> >>> -             pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
> >>> -             if (!pf) {
> >>> +             ctx.pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
> >>> +             if (!ctx.pf) {
> >>>                        printf("Error: get Null context in port %u\n", port_id);
> >>>                        continue;
> >>>                }
> >>> -             printf("%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%c%c%c\t\n",
> >>> -                    pf->id,
> >>> -                    pf->rule.attr->group,
> >>> -                    pf->rule.attr->priority,
> >>> -                    pf->rule.attr->ingress ? 'i' : '-',
> >>> -                    pf->rule.attr->egress ? 'e' : '-',
> >>> -                    pf->rule.attr->transfer ? 't' : '-');
> >>> +             switch (ctx.pf->ctype) {
> >>
> >>
> >> At this stage you don't know if the context is 'pf' or 'psa', but you
> >> rely that both structure first element is "enum testpmd_context_type"
> >> and this requirement is completely undocumented.
> >
> > Yes, will add a comment.
> >
> >>
> >> Why don't create a common context and pass that one the the age
> >> action for both 'pf' & 'psa', like
> >>
> >> struct port_flow_age_action_context {
> >>       enum testpmd_context_type ctype;
> >>       union {
> >>           struct port_flow *pf;
> >>           struct port_shared_action *psa;
> >>       } ctx;
> >> };
> >
> > We considered this option too,
> > It looked us more optimized to not utilize more memory and alloc\free time
> for each age context.
> >
> > One more option we considered:
> >
> > Use age action context pointer as uint32_t\uintptr_t - use 2 bits for type and
> others for pf->id psa->id.
> > What do you think about this?
> >
> 
> Will 'id' be enough? I see other information is used, though not sure if it is only
> for print.
> 

From the id we can get the pointer(and other information) - this is the same ID as supplied by the command line user to query\destroy an existed flows.

> I will be unexpected to use the pointer for id but it works, can you please add
> enough comment to clarify the usage?

If you mean code comment, yes I will add.

> >
> >> I think this also prevents to corrupt 'pf' and 'psa' just for age action.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>> +             case CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW:
> >>> +                     printf("%-20s\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32 "\t%" PRIu32
> >>> +                                                              "\t%c%c%c\t\n",
> >>> +                            "Flow",
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->id,
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->rule.attr->group,
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->rule.attr->priority,
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->rule.attr->ingress ? 'i' : '-',
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->rule.attr->egress ? 'e' : '-',
> >>> +                            ctx.pf->rule.attr->transfer ? 't' : '-');
> >>> +                     break;
> >>> +             case CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION:
> >>> +                     printf("%-20s\t%" PRIu32 "\n", "Shared action",
> >>> +                            ctx.psa->id);
> >>> +                     break;
> >>> +             default:
> >>> +                     printf("Error: invalid context type %u\n", port_id);
> >>> +                     break;
> >>> +             }
> >>>        }
> >>>        if (destroy) {
> >>>                int ret;
> >>> @@ -2426,15 +2451,15 @@ struct rte_flow_shared_action *
> >>>                total = 0;
> >>>                printf("\n");
> >>>                for (idx = 0; idx < nb_context; idx++) {
> >>> -                     pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
> >>> -                     if (!pf)
> >>> +                     ctx.pf = (struct port_flow *)contexts[idx];
> >>> +                     if (!ctx.pf || ctx.pf->ctype !=
> >>> + CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW)
> >>>                                continue;
> >>
> >> When the context is 'CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION', who destroys it?
> >
> > Destroy request is optional, I didn't add a support to destroy something here:
> > 1 options here is to save all the flows assigned to the age shared action inside
> the shared action context and destroy all of them + the shared aged action.
> > It can be step 2 later.
> >
> 
> OK
> 
> >>
> >>> -                     flow_id = pf->id;
> >>> +                     flow_id = ctx.pf->id;
> >>>                        ret = port_flow_destroy(port_id, 1, &flow_id);
> >>>                        if (!ret)
> >>>                                total++;
> >>>                }
> >>> -             printf("%d flows be destroyed\n", total);
> >>> +             printf("%d flows destroyed\n", total);
> >>>        }
> >>>        free(contexts);
> >>>    }
> >>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h index
> >>> 519d551..92aaa19 100644
> >>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> >>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> >>> @@ -143,8 +143,14 @@ struct fwd_stream {
> >>>        struct pkt_burst_stats tx_burst_stats;
> >>>    };
> >>>
> >>> +enum testpmd_context_type {
> >>> +     CONTEXT_TYPE_FLOW,
> >>> +     CONTEXT_TYPE_SHARED_ACTION,
> >>> +};
> >>> +
> >>
> >> The enum prefix is too generic, 'CONTEXT_TYPE_', what do you think
> >> clarifying what context we are talking about?
> >
> > enum flow_age_action_context_type {
> >       FLOW_AGE_ACTION_CTX_FLOW,
> >       FLOW_AGE_ACTION_CTX_SHARED_ACTION,
> > }
> >
> > ?
> 
> I think better, thanks.
> 
> >>
> >>>    /** Descriptor for a single flow. */
> >>>    struct port_flow {
> >>> +     enum testpmd_context_type ctype; /**< Context type. */
> >>>        struct port_flow *next; /**< Next flow in list. */
> >>>        struct port_flow *tmp; /**< Temporary linking. */
> >>>        uint32_t id; /**< Flow rule ID. */ @@ -155,6 +161,7 @@ struct
> >>> port_flow {
> >>>
> >>>    /* Descriptor for shared action */
> >>>    struct port_shared_action {
> >>> +     enum testpmd_context_type ctype; /**< Context type. */
> >>>        struct port_shared_action *next; /**< Next flow in list. */
> >>>        uint32_t id; /**< Shared action ID. */
> >>>        enum rte_flow_action_type type; /**< Action type. */
> >>>
> >
> >
> > What do you think about changing the rte_flow_get_aged_flows API name to
> rte_flow_get_aged_contexts ?
> >
> 
> Here context has some data do identify the aged flows, right? If so
> 'rte_flow_get_aged_flows' also reasonable I think.
> 
> No strong opinion but the API name as it is looks good to me.

OK, thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-04 13:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-01 17:48 Matan Azrad
2020-11-02 18:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-03  7:33   ` Matan Azrad
2020-11-04 12:58     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-04 13:28       ` Matan Azrad [this message]
2020-11-04 13:45         ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-05 21:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Matan Azrad
2020-11-06 13:57   ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-07 17:30     ` Matan Azrad
2020-11-09 10:21       ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-09 10:38         ` Matan Azrad
2020-11-09 11:12           ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-10  8:30             ` Ori Kam
2020-11-10  9:43               ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-10 10:58                 ` Matan Azrad
2020-11-10 17:06   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Matan Azrad
2020-11-11 12:51     ` Ferruh Yigit

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=MW2PR12MB2492691971F3A4EB25A1D20BDFEF0@MW2PR12MB2492.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=matan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=beilei.xing@intel.com \
    --cc=bernard.iremonger@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=orika@nvidia.com \
    --cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git