On 16-02-24 03:47 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 08:03:56PM CET, john.fastab...@gmail.com wrote:
If users want to run filters specifically in hardware without software
running the classifiers we need to use a special handler for this.
By using a new classifier list we are able to add filters in hardware
and keep all the same semantics in the core module. So the core code
will continue to block duplicate entries, incorrect usage of flags
such as exclusive, and all the other cases software already handles.
Additionally by having a filter list that is not run by software in
the datapath we avoid any overhead related to adding these rules in
the hot path.
The new filter list TC_H_MIN_INGRESS_HW is logically run in front
of the TC_H_MIN_INGRESS filter list. Driver writers can avoid aborting
on many cases that would potentially conflict with software rules in
the TC_H_MIN_INGRESS filter list this way.
Oh, although it looks straightforward to implement this, I don't like it.
User should be able to do the same thing he did before, only extension
would be to allow to pass 2 flags for adding rules:
SKIP_HW
SKIP_SW
Default would be to add rule to both.
u32 and other classifiers should take care of processing this flags
internaly and act accordingly. The implementation can be just to skip
rule in sw processing or it can maintain hw-only structures.
I think there is another axis: To add it to sofware but execute it in
hardware (and not in s/ware).
This way you can do faster lookups from user space (control
purposes) and from the hardware you can periodically update things to
synchronize things like stats for example.
IOW, this compensates for h/ware interfaces being slow and not needing
to keep talking to them when you dont have to.
BTW: At netdev01 - the mellanox people and qualcom both complained about
this (low speed) issue. I believe someone was recommending a
"EINPROGRESS" netlink msg or even lying for the set case to say
"success" when in fact it wasnt. EINPROGRESS may still be a useful idea
but a different discussion.
cheers,
jamal
