From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Fastabend Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/8] net/mlx5e: Introduce tc offload support Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 09:13:25 -0800 Message-ID: <56D5CDB5.4090906@gmail.com> References: <1456842290-7844-1-git-send-email-amir@vadai.me> <1456842290-7844-7-git-send-email-amir@vadai.me> <20160301145208.GB2098@nanopsycho.orion> <56d5c9bd.c13fc20a.046a.ffffe0ce@mx.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Or Gerlitz , John Fastabend , Saeed Mahameed , Hadar Har-Zion , Jiri Pirko To: Amir Vadai , Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.220.53]:36778 "EHLO mail-pa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751495AbcCARNl (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:13:41 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id yy13so115297440pab.3 for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 09:13:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56d5c9bd.c13fc20a.046a.ffffe0ce@mx.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 16-03-01 09:00 AM, Amir Vadai wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 03:52:08PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 03:24:48PM CET, amir@vadai.me wrote: >>> Extend ndo_setup_tc() to support ingress tc offloading. Will be used by >>> later patches to offload tc flower filter. >>> >>> Feature is off by default and could be enabled by issuing: >>> # ethtool -K eth0 hw-tc-offload on >>> >>> Offloads flow table is dynamically created when first filter is >>> added. >>> Rules are saved in a hash table that is maintained by the consumer (for >>> example - the flower offload in the next patch). >>> When last filter is removed and no filters exist in the hash table, the >>> offload flow table is destroyed. >> >> >> >>> @@ -1880,6 +1883,17 @@ static int mlx5e_setup_tc(struct net_device *netdev, u8 tc) >>> static int mlx5e_ndo_setup_tc(struct net_device *dev, u32 handle, >>> __be16 proto, struct tc_to_netdev *tc) >>> { >>> + struct mlx5e_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev); >>> + >>> + if (TC_H_MAJ(handle) != TC_H_MAJ(TC_H_INGRESS)) >>> + goto mqprio; >>> + >>> + switch (tc->type) { >>> + default: >>> + return -EINVAL; >> >> -EOPNOTSUPP would be better here perhaps? >> >> >>> + } >>> + >>> +mqprio: >>> if (handle != TC_H_ROOT || tc->type != TC_SETUP_MQPRIO) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> >>> @@ -1963,6 +1977,13 @@ static int mlx5e_set_features(struct net_device *netdev, >>> mlx5e_disable_vlan_filter(priv); >>> } >>> >>> + if ((changes & NETIF_F_HW_TC) && !(features & NETIF_F_HW_TC) && >>> + mlx5e_tc_num_filters(priv)) { >>> + netdev_err(netdev, >>> + "Active offloaded tc filters, can't turn hw_tc_offload off\n"); >>> + return -EINVAL; >> >> This should not fail I believe. Just disable it in hw. I would even toss >> away the rules if necessary. > It depends on the answer regarding your comment on the previous patch. > If we have the rule in both SW and HW, and remove it from the HW it is > ok (although, currently I don't understand why would anyone want in both > places). > If the rule is processed by HW only - turning off this flag, will > disable the offloaded rules - it might be misleading, so I prefered not > to allow it and print a message. When we get the HW only mode we will need to also flush the hardware representation in software as well as the hardware state.