Hi, Kevin > As it's a bit grey, I will backport to 18.11 on the understanding that it > will be > supported by Mellanox and you will test one of the 18.11.1-RC's to make sure > there are no regressions on the existing behavior - is that reasonable? > Yes, it is quite reasonable, I will test it. This code is also merged in 19.02, so the related problems are not very likely.
WBR, Slava (aka Viacheslav) > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 13:01 > To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler > <shah...@mellanox.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; sta...@dpdk.org; Thomas Monjalon > <tho...@monjalon.net>; Yongseok Koh <ys...@mellanox.com>; Luca > Boccassi <bl...@debian.org>; sta...@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/5] net/mlx5: add inner tunnel items support > on E-Switch > > On 01/31/2019 04:13 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: > > Hi, Kevin > > > > Hi Slava, > > > It is rather refactoring, not new feature, tunnel inner items support is > partially present in 18.11. > > Yes, this patchset is too big to be simple fix, and updates not so much to > > be > new feature. > > It is very early patch (after 18.11 release), just mailed later, > > rebase on the top was done automatically and quite simple, because it > > touches merely E-Switch subsystem (merge should not be difficult - mostly > mlx5_flow_tcf.c is changed) and highly desirable to be backported. > > It fixes serious bugs with ether_type field, which limit VLAN and VXLAN > functionality on E-Switch. > > > > The issue I have is it also adding functionality and more importantly > reworking how some existing behavior is handled (e.g. outer tunnel validation > moving in 1/5). But, yes, it is completely isolated to mlx5/tcf and applies > cleanly, so that is a positive. > > As it's a bit grey, I will backport to 18.11 on the understanding that it > will be > supported by Mellanox and you will test one of the 18.11.1-RC's to make sure > there are no regressions on the existing behavior - is that reasonable? > > thanks, > Kevin. > > > With best regards, > > Slava (aka Viacheslav) > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 16:52 > >> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler > >> <shah...@mellanox.com> > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; sta...@dpdk.org; Thomas Monjalon > >> <tho...@monjalon.net>; Yongseok Koh <ys...@mellanox.com>; Luca > >> Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/5] net/mlx5: add inner tunnel items > >> support on E-Switch > >> > >> On 12/27/2018 03:34 PM, Viacheslav Ovsiienko wrote: > >>> The generic Flow rule for tunnels looks like: > >>> > >>> flow create <attributes> <port> \ > >>> <tunnel outer items pattern> \ > >>> <tunnel vni item> \ > >>> <tunnel inner items pattern> > >>> > >>> Current design supports only L2 addresses as inner pattern items. > >>> This patchset adds support for L3 (IPv4/IPv6) addresses and L4 > >>> (TCP/UDP) ports items as inner tunnel parameters. > >>> > >>> Also this patchset adds support for inner and outer ethernet types > >>> for the E-Switch Flows with tunnels. Inner and outer ethernet type > >>> match can be specified with ethernet items, vlan items, or > >>> implicitly deduced from IP address items. The tcm_info field in > >>> Netlink message tcm structure is filled always with outer protocol. > >>> > >>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org > >>> > >> > >> Hi Viacheslav - these are new features, not a bugfixes. Are the > >> sta...@dpdk.org tags intentional? > >> > >> From > >> https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdoc > >> .dp > >> dk.org%2Fguides%2Fcontributing%2Fstable.html%23what-changes-should- > be > >> - > >> > backported&data=02%7C01%7Cviacheslavo%40mellanox.com%7C1d6e08 > >> > fe6f7f47d83f7e08d6878bb56d%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0 > >> > %7C0%7C636845431441557730&sdata=%2Fmgoj2Il%2Fu4CCrkAcETdoMp > >> d7Ri5ash%2FUhzGv1dLXLY%3D&reserved=0 > >> > >> -- > >> Features should not be backported to stable releases. It may be > >> acceptable, in limited cases, to back port features for the LTS > >> release > >> where: > >> > >> There is a justifiable use case (for example a new PMD). > >> The change is non-invasive. > >> The work of preparing the backport is done by the proposer. > >> There is support within the community. > >> -- > >> > >> Kevin. > >> > >> > >>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viachesl...@mellanox.com> > >>> > >>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (5): > >>> net/mlx5: remove checks for outer tunnel items on E-Switch > >>> net/mlx5: add tunnel inner items validation on E-Switch > >>> net/mlx5: add tunnel inner items support on E-Switch > >>> net/mlx5: add ethernet type validation on E-Switch > >>> net/mlx5: add ethernet type support for tunnels on E-Switch > >>> > >>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c | 690 > >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > >>> 1 file changed, 399 insertions(+), 291 deletions(-) > >>> > >