From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Boris Sukholitko <boris.sukholitko@broadcom.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
"Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
zhang kai <zhangkaiheb@126.com>,
Yoshiki Komachi <komachi.yoshiki@gmail.com>,
Ilya Lifshits <ilya.lifshits@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/5] net/sched: flower: Consider the number of tags for vlan filters
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 16:17:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YlWJ3TCKhih5qM/M@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220412131610.GB2451@noodle>
Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 03:16:10PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@broadcom.com wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 02:12:15PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:40:49PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@broadcom.com wrote:
>> >On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 01:09:35PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:02:36PM CEST, boris.sukholitko@broadcom.com wrote:
>> >> >Currently the existence of vlan filters is conditional on the vlan
>> >> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. I.e. the following rule:
>> >> >
>> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
>> >> >
>> >> >is illegal because we lack protocol 802.1q in the rule.
>> >> >
>> >> >Having the num_of_vlans filter configured removes this restriction. The
>> >> >following rule becomes ok:
>> >> >
>> >> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
>> >> >
>> >> >because we know that the packet is single tagged.
>> >> >
>> >> >We achieve the above by having is_vlan_key helper look at the number of
>> >>
>> >> Sorry to be a nitpicker, but who's "we"? When I read the patch
>> >> description, I need to understand clearly what the patch is doing, which
>> >> is not this case. You suppose to command the codebase what to do.
>> >> I fail to see that :/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >What do you think of the following description? The description consists
>> >of two parts: the first provides motivation for the patch, the second is
>> >the way the motivation is implemented. I've judiciously edited out the
>> >"we"-word. :)
>> >
>> ><description>
>> >
>> >Currently the existence of vlan filters is conditional on the vlan
>> >protocol being matched in the tc rule. I.e. the following rule:
>> >
>> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
>> >
>> >is illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.
>> >
>> >Having the num_of_vlans filter configured removes this restriction. The
>> >following rule becomes ok:
>> >
>> >tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
>>
>> So this is what this patch allows?
>
>Yes.
>
>> You are talking about it as it is
>> already possible with the code before this patch being applied.
>>
>
>Sorry for the confusion. In the updated description I try to make the
>distinction much clearer.
>
>>
>> >
>> >because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.
>> >
>> >To make the above possible, is_vlan_key helper is changed to look at the
>> >number of vlans in addition to the vlan ethertype.
>>
>> What "is changed"? You should tell the codebase what to do, what toadd,
>> remove or change. If you did that, it would be very clear to the reader
>> what the patch is supposed to do.
>>
>
>The "changed" refers to the code of is_vlan_key function which is
>changed by this patch. Please see the updated description.
>
>>
>> >
>> >Outer tag vlan filters (e.g. vlan_prio) require the number of vlan tags
>> >be greater than 0. Inner filters (e.g. cvlan_prio) require the number of
>> >vlan tags be greater than 1.
>>
>> Again, unclear what this describes, if the current code before the patch
>> or the state after this patch.
>>
>
>What about the following:
>
><description>
>
>Before this commit the existence of vlan filters was conditional on the vlan
>protocol being matched in the tc rule. For example, the following rule:
>
>tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower vlan_prio 5
>
>was illegal because vlan protocol (e.g. 802.1q) does not appear in the rule.
>
>This commit removes the above restriction. Having the num_of_vlans
Say rather just "Remove the above restriction. ..."
>filter configured allows further matching on vlan attributes. The
>following rule is ok now:
>
>tc filter add dev eth1 ingress flower num_of_vlans 1 vlan_prio 5
>
>because having num_of_vlans==1 implies that the packet is single tagged.
>
>To do this, this commit changes is_vlan_key helper to look at the number
"Change the is_vlan_key helper to look..."
Don't talk about "this commit".
>of vlans in addition to the vlan ethertype. Outer (e.g. vlan_prio) and
>inner (e.g. cvlan_prio) tag vlan filters require the number of vlan tags
>to be greater then 0 and 1 accordingly.
>
>As a result of this commit, the ethertype may be set to 0 when matching
>on the number of vlans. This commit changes fl_set_key_vlan to avoid
>setting key, mask vlan_tpid for the 0 ethertype.
>
></description>
>
>Is this going into the right direction?
>
>Thanks,
>Boris.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-12 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-12 10:02 [PATCH net-next v2 0/5] net/sched: flower: match on the number of vlan tags Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH net-next v2 1/5] net/sched: flower: Helper function for vlan ethtype checks Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH net-next v2 2/5] net/sched: flower: Reduce identation after is_key_vlan refactoring Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH net-next v2 3/5] flow_dissector: Add number of vlan tags dissector Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH net-next v2 4/5] net/sched: flower: Add number of vlan tags filter Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 10:02 ` [PATCH net-next v2 5/5] net/sched: flower: Consider the number of tags for vlan filters Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 11:09 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-04-12 11:40 ` Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 12:12 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-04-12 13:16 ` Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-12 14:17 ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2022-04-13 8:14 ` Boris Sukholitko
2022-04-13 11:44 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-04-13 12:11 ` Boris Sukholitko
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=YlWJ3TCKhih5qM/M@nanopsycho \
--to=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=boris.sukholitko@broadcom.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=ilya.lifshits@broadcom.com \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=komachi.yoshiki@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.com \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
--cc=zhangkaiheb@126.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