From: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@waldekranz.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Marek Behun <marek.behun@nic.cz>,
vivien.didelot@gmail.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: link aggregation support
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 20:37:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87blgnv4rt.fsf@waldekranz.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201027190034.utk3kkywc54zuxfn@skbuf>
On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 21:00, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 07:25:16PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
>> > 1) trunk user ports, with team/bonding controlling it
>> > 2) trunk DSA ports, i.e. the ports between switches in a D in DSA setup
>> > 3) trunk CPU ports.
> [...]
>> I think that (2) and (3) are essentially the same problem, i.e. creating
>> LAGs out of DSA links, be they switch-to-switch or switch-to-cpu
>> connections. I think you are correct that the CPU port can not be a
>> LAG/trunk, but I believe that limitation only applies to TO_CPU packets.
>
> Which would still be ok? They are called "slow protocol PDUs" for a reason.
Oh yes, completely agree. That was the point I was trying to make :)
>> In order for this to work on transmit, we need to add forward offloading
>> to the bridge so that we can, for example, send one FORWARD from the CPU
>> to send an ARP broadcast to swp1..4 instead of four FROM_CPUs.
>
> That surely sounds like an interesting (and tough to implement)
> optimization to increase the throughput, but why would it be _needed_
> for things to work? What's wrong with 4 FROM_CPU packets?
We have internal patches that do this, and I can confirm that it is
tough :) I really would like to figure out a way to solve this, that
would also be acceptable upstream. I have some ideas, it is on my TODO.
In a single-chip system I agree that it is not needed, the CPU can do
the load-balancing in software. But in order to have the hardware do
load-balancing on a switch-to-switch LAG, you need to send a FORWARD.
FROM_CPUs would just follow whatever is in the device mapping table. You
essentially have the inverse of the TO_CPU problem, but on Tx FROM_CPU
would make up 100% of traffic.
Other than that there are some things that, while strictly speaking
possible to do without FORWARDs, become much easier to deal with:
- Multicast routing. This is one case where performance _really_ suffers
from having to skb_clone() to each recipient.
- Bridging between virtual interfaces and DSA ports. Typical example is
an L2 VPN tunnel or one end of a veth pair. On FROM_CPUs, the switch
can not perform SA learning, which means that once you bridge traffic
from the VPN out to a DSA port, the return traffic will be classified
as unknown unicast by the switch and be flooded everywhere.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-27 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-27 10:51 [RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: link aggregation support Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 10:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: use ethertyped dsa for 6390/6390X Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 14:52 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 14:54 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 14:58 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 10:51 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] net: dsa: link aggregation support Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 0:58 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-28 14:03 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 10:51 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: " Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-29 5:28 ` kernel test robot
2020-10-29 11:54 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-10-29 11:54 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-10-27 10:51 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] net: dsa: tag_edsa: support reception of packets from lag devices Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 12:05 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-28 15:28 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 18:18 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-28 22:31 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 23:08 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-29 7:47 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-30 9:21 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-01 11:31 ` Ido Schimmel
2020-10-27 12:27 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: link aggregation support Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-27 14:29 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-10-27 14:59 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 14:00 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-10-27 15:09 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 15:05 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 15:23 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-10-27 18:25 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 18:33 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 19:04 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-27 19:21 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 19:00 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-27 19:37 ` Tobias Waldekranz [this message]
2020-10-27 20:02 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-27 20:53 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-27 22:32 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-10-28 0:27 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 22:35 ` Marek Behun
2020-10-27 22:36 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-10-28 0:45 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-10-28 1:03 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-11-11 4:28 ` Florian Fainelli
2020-11-19 10:51 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-19 11:52 ` Tobias Waldekranz
2020-11-19 18:12 ` Vladimir Oltean
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=87blgnv4rt.fsf@waldekranz.com \
--to=tobias@waldekranz.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=marek.behun@nic.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=vivien.didelot@gmail.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.