On 04-04-18 14:28, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > Hi Suricata people, > > When Eric Leblond (and I helped) integrated XDP in Suricata, we ran > into the issue, that at Suricata load/start time, we cannot determine > if the chosen XDP config options, like xdp-cpu-redirect[1], is valid on > this HW (e.g require driver XDP_REDIRECT support and bpf cpumap). > > We would have liked a way to report that suricata.yaml config was > invalid for this hardware/setup. Now, it just loads, and packets gets > silently dropped by XDP (well a WARN_ONCE and catchable via tracepoints). > > My question to suricata developers: (Q1) Do you already have code that > query the kernel or drivers for features? > > > At the IOvisor call (2 weeks ago), we discussed two options of exposing > XDP features avail in a given driver. > > Option#1: Extend existing ethtool -k/-K "offload and other features" > with some XDP features, that userspace can query. (Do you already query > offloads, regarding Q1)
I think if it would use the ioctl ETHTOOL interface it'd be easiest for us, as we already have code for this in place to check for offloading settings. See [1]. > Option#2: Invent a new 'ip link set xdp' netlink msg with a query option. Do you have an example of how this is queried? > (Q2) Do Suricata devs have any preference (or other options/ideas) for > the way the kernel expose this info to userspace? Right now I think extending the ethtool logic is best for us. [1] https://github.com/OISF/suricata/blob/master/src/util-ioctl.c#L326 -- --------------------------------------------- Victor Julien http://www.inliniac.net/ PGP: http://www.inliniac.net/victorjulien.asc --------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ iovisor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.iovisor.org/mailman/listinfo/iovisor-dev
