[Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next] net: ixgbe: Fix cls_u32 offload support for ports and fields with masks.

[John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>]

On 16-03-04 03:07 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/4/2016 2:22 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
>> On 16-03-04 01:27 PM, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
>>> On 3/4/2016 12:41 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
>>>> On 16-03-04 11:47 AM, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
>>>>> Fix support for 16 bit source/dest port matches in ixgbe model.
>>>>> u32 uses a single 32-bit key value for both source and destination
>>>>> ports
>>>>> starting at offset 0. So replace the 2 functions with a single
>>>>> function
>>>>> that takes this key value/mask to program both source and dest ports.
>>>>>
>>>>> Remove the incorrect check for mask in ixgbe_configure_clsu32()
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested with the following filters:
>>>>>
>>>>>    #tc qdisc add dev p4p1 ingress
>>>>>    #tc filter add dev p4p1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 99 \
>>>>>      handle 800:0:1 u32 ht 800: \
>>>>>      match ip dst 11.0.0.1/24 match ip src 11.0.0.2/24 action drop
>>>>>
>>>>>    #tc filter del dev p4p1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 99 \
>>>>>      handle 800:0:1 u32
>>>>>    #tc filter add dev p4p1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 99 \
>>>>>      handle 1: u32 divisor 1
>>>>>    #tc filter add dev p4p1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 99 \
>>>>>      handle 800:0:10 u32 ht 800: link 1: \
>>>>>      offset at 0 mask 0f00 shift 6 plus 0 eat match ip protocol 6 ff
>>>>>    #tc filter add dev p4p1 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 99 \
>>>>>      handle 1:0:10 u32 ht 1: \
>>>>>      match tcp src 1024 ffff match tcp dst 80 ffff action drop
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>> But this will break setting only dst port or only src port.
>>> No. This will not break specifying only src or dst port. The value/mask
>>> for the
>>> unspecified port will be set to zero. So it should be fine.
>>>
>>> For ex:
>>>      match tcp src 1024 ffff match tcp dst 80 ffff
>>>          => match 04000050/ffffffff at nexthdr+0
>>>      match tcp src 1024 ffff
>>>          => match 04000000/ffff0000 at nexthdr+0
>>>      match tcp dst 80 ffff
>>>          => match 00000050/0000ffff at nexthdr+0
>>>
>>>
>>>>    Do we
>>>> actually need three signatures to match? Something like,
>>>>
>>>>     static struct ixgbe_mat_field ixgbe_tcp_fields[] = {
>>>>      {.off = 0, .mask = 0xffffffff, .val = ixgbe_mat_prgm_ports,
>>>>          .type = IXGBE_ATR_FLOW_TYPE_TCPV4},
>>>>      {.off = 0, .mask = 0xffff0000, .val = ixgbe_mat_prgm_dport,
>>>>          .type = IXGBE_ATR_FLOW_TYPE_TCPV4},
>>>>      {.off = 0, .mask = 0x0000ffff, .val = ixgbe_mat_prgm_sport,
>>>>          .type = IXGBE_ATR_FLOW_TYPE_TCPV4},
>>>>         { .val = NULL } /* terminal node */
>>>>     };
>>>>
>>>> Also just a reminder if we get multiple fields in a ixgbe_mat_field
>>>> struct we need to abort out of the for loop in the cls_u32 configure
>>>> function. Actually we can probably just push that as its own patch
>>>> to make the core function more versatile/usable.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> John
>> Dropped netdev no reason to push mail to netdev that has to do with our
>> driver internals.
>>
>> OK I see so you dropped the .mask check in fact you actually put it
>> there in the commit message I just missed the detail/implication.
>>
>> I think this is fine and it allows supporting mask entries now which
>> I blocked in the initial submission. But with this is there any reason
>> to have a mask field in ixgbe_mat_field? We could probably do this with
>> two patches, one to drop the 'mask' field and check and another to fix
>> the ixgbe_tcp_fields patch?
> 
> OK. will remove the 'mask' field and resubmit as 2 patches.
> 
> Thanks
> Sridhar

Great nice catch / improvements. By the way my goal here is to get
to the point where we can share this across drivers and just change
the *model.h file.

.John