From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>,
Mateusz Pacuszka <mateuszx.pacuszka@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v4 6/6] ice: enable LLDP TX for VFs through tc
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:59:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250220145908.GD1615191@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250214085215.2846063-7-larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 09:50:40AM +0100, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> Only a single VSI can be in charge of sending LLDP frames, sometimes it is
> beneficial to assign this function to a VF, that is possible to do with tc
> capabilities in the switchdev mode. It requires first blocking the PF from
> sending the LLDP frames with a following command:
>
> tc filter add dev <ifname> egress protocol lldp flower skip_sw action drop
>
> Then it becomes possible to configure a forward rule from a VF port
> representor to uplink instead.
>
> tc filter add dev <vf_ifname> ingress protocol lldp flower skip_sw
> action mirred egress redirect dev <ifname>
>
> How LLDP exclusivity was done previously is LLDP traffic was blocked for a
> whole port by a single rule and PF was bypassing that. Now at least in the
> switchdev mode, every separate VSI has to have its own drop rule. Another
> complication is the fact that tc does not respect when the driver refuses
> to delete a rule, so returning an error results in a HW rule still present
> with no way to reference it through tc. This is addressed by allowing the
> PF rule to be deleted at any time, but making the VF forward rule "dormant"
> in such case, this means it is deleted from HW but stays in tc and driver's
> bookkeeping to be restored when drop rule is added back to the PF.
>
> Implement tc configuration handling which enables the user to transmit LLDP
> packets from VF instead of PF.
>
> Reviewed-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-20 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-14 8:50 [PATCH iwl-next v4 0/6] ice: LLDP support for VFs Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 1/6] ice: fix check for existing switch rule Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:55 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-11 10:24 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 2/6] ice: do not add LLDP-specific filter if not necessary Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:56 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-11 10:24 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 3/6] ice: receive LLDP on trusted VFs Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:58 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-11 10:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 4/6] ice: remove headers argument from ice_tc_count_lkups Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:58 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-11 10:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 5/6] ice: support egress drop rules on PF Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:58 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-11 10:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-02-14 8:50 ` [PATCH iwl-next v4 6/6] ice: enable LLDP TX for VFs through tc Larysa Zaremba
2025-02-20 14:59 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2025-03-11 10:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
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=20250220145908.GD1615191@kernel.org \
--to=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=larysa.zaremba@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mateuszx.pacuszka@intel.com \
--cc=michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@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
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).