netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Amir Vadai\"" <amir@vadai.me>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: jiri@resnulli.us, daniel@iogearbox.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	jhs@mojatatu.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 3/4] net: sched: cls_u32 add bit to specify software only rules
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:04:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160224080440.GA26500@office.Home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160223190321.5970.58924.stgit@john-Precision-Tower-5810>

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:03:21AM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
> In the initial implementation the only way to stop a rule from being
> inserted into the hardware table was via the device feature flag.
> However this doesn't work well when working on an end host system
> where packets are expect to hit both the hardware and software
> datapaths.
> 
> For example we can imagine a rule that will match an IP address and
> increment a field. If we install this rule in both hardware and
> software we may increment the field twice. To date we have only
> added support for the drop action so we have been able to ignore
> these cases. But as we extend the action support we will hit this
> example plus more such cases. Arguably these are not even corner
> cases in many working systems these cases will be common.
> 
> To avoid forcing the driver to always abort (i.e. the above example)
> this patch adds a flag to add a rule in software only. A careful
> user can use this flag to build software and hardware datapaths
> that work together. One example we have found particularly useful
> is to use hardware resources to set the skb->mark on the skb when
> the match may be expensive to run in software but a mark lookup
> in a hash table is cheap. The idea here is hardware can do in one
> lookup what the u32 classifier may need to traverse multiple lists
> and hash tables to compute. The flag is only passed down on inserts
> on deletion to avoid stale references in hardware we always try
> to remove a rule if it exists.
> 
> Notice we do not add a hardware only case here. If you were to
> add a hardware only case then you are stuck with the problem
> of where to stick the software representation of that filter
> rule. If its stuck on the same filter list as the software only and
> software/hardware rules it then has to be walked over and ignored
> in the classify path. The overhead is not huge but is measurable.
> And with so much work being invested in speeding up rx/tx of
> pkt processing this is unacceptable IMO. The other option is to
> have a special hook just for hardware only resources. This is
> implemented in the next patch.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>

[...]

>  
> -static bool u32_should_offload(struct net_device *dev)
> +static bool u32_should_offload(struct net_device *dev, u32 flags)
>  {
>  	if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_TC))
>  		return false;
>  
> -	return dev->netdev_ops->ndo_setup_tc;
> +	if (flags & TCA_U32_FLAGS_SOFTWARE)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	if (!dev->netdev_ops->ndo_setup_tc)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	return true;
>  }
This function and flag should be a generic filter attribute - not just
u32.

Thanks,
Amir

[...]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-02-24  8:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-23 19:02 [net-next PATCH 1/4] net: sched: consolidate offload decision in cls_u32 John Fastabend
2016-02-23 19:02 ` [net-next PATCH 2/4] net: cls_u32: move TC offload feature bit into cls_u32 offload logic John Fastabend
2016-02-24  6:12   ` Simon Horman
2016-02-24 13:21   ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-23 19:03 ` [net-next PATCH 3/4] net: sched: cls_u32 add bit to specify software only rules John Fastabend
2016-02-23 22:29   ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2016-02-23 23:30     ` John Fastabend
2016-02-24  6:11   ` Simon Horman
2016-02-24  7:24     ` John Fastabend
2016-02-24  8:04   ` Amir Vadai" [this message]
2016-02-24  8:40     ` Jiri Pirko
2016-02-24  8:55       ` John Fastabend
2016-02-24  9:29         ` Jiri Benc
2016-02-25  4:09           ` John Fastabend
2016-02-25 13:19             ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-25 16:39               ` John Fastabend
2016-02-24 13:31   ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-25  4:04     ` John Fastabend
2016-02-25 12:56       ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-25 21:56         ` John Fastabend
2016-02-25 23:05           ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-25 23:08             ` John Fastabend
2016-02-23 19:03 ` [net-next PATCH 4/4] net: sched: create hardware only classifier filter John Fastabend
2016-02-24  8:47   ` Jiri Pirko
2016-02-25 13:14     ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2016-02-25 17:36       ` John Fastabend
2016-02-24  6:12 ` [net-next PATCH 1/4] net: sched: consolidate offload decision in cls_u32 Simon Horman
2016-02-24  8:49 ` Jiri Pirko
2016-02-24 13:20 ` Jamal Hadi Salim

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=20160224080440.GA26500@office.Home \
    --to=amir@vadai.me \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
    --cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).