On 3/23/22 16:41, Finn, Emma wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday 17 March 2022 13:10 >> To: Eli Britstein <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Finn, Emma >> <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected]; Stokes, Ian <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH V4 1/2] netdev-offload-dpdk: Use has_vlan match >> attribute >> >> On 3/16/22 14:56, Eli Britstein wrote: >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ilya Maximets <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 2:43 PM >>>> To: Eli Britstein <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Emma Finn >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: [email protected]; Ian Stokes <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH V4 1/2] netdev-offload-dpdk: Use >>>> has_vlan match attribute >>>> >>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2/7/22 17:56, Eli Britstein via dev wrote: >>>>> DPDK 20.11 introduced an ability to specify existance/non-existance >>>>> of VLAN tag by [1]. >>>>> Use this attribute. >>>>> >>>>> [1]: 09315fc83861 ("ethdev: add VLAN attributes to ethernet and VLAN >>>>> items") >>>> >>>> Hi, Eli. I'm afraid we still can't use the 'has_vlan' item until >>>> there are drivers that silently ignore it. And, unfortunately, there >>>> are may of them. I created a DPDK bug for that issue: >>> AFAIU, the problem is not about drivers silently ignoring, but with drivers >>> that >> fail validation when using this flag. >>> If a driver silently ignores, the same behavior as if not using this flag >>> at all. >> >> I believe that i40e driver silently ignores the field, but it was reported >> that >> offloading is broken with that driver for some reason. >> >> Emma, Ian, could you, please, give more information on what exactly happens >> with i40e driver if this patch set applied? >> >> If the validation actually fails, I don't see a problem with applying the >> patch set, >> because correctness is more important. But if there are drivers that accept >> the >> flow, but ignores the flag, we are getting into "what is more broken?" >> territory, >> so it might be OK to get the patches anyway, I'm not sure. This part we >> need to >> discuss, but we need more information, as what exactly is happening with the >> i40e driver. >> > > With these patches applied, only partial offload of VLAN flows will fail to > match on the > inner_type. > > |WARN|dpdk0: rte_flow creation failed: 13 (Unsupported inner_type.). > |WARN|dpdk0: Failed flow: flow create 3 ingress priority 0 group 0 pattern > eth > src is f6:e5:d4:c3:b2:a1 dst is 1a:2b:3c:4d:5e:6f has_vlan is 1 / vlan > inner_type is > 0x800 tci spec 0x7b tci mask 0xefff / ipv4 fragment_offset is 0x0 / end > actions > mark id 1 / rss / end > > I tested this with other flows (Eth, IPv4) i.e when has_vlan is 0, and those > flows will > offload correctly when this series is applied.
OK. Thanks for checking. Based on this conversation and conversations during public meetings, applied to master and branch-2.17. Best regards, Ilya Maximets. > > +CC Beilei, maintainer of the i40e PMD. > Link to these patches here - > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/list/?series=284866 > Link to DPDK bug report being tracked here - > https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=958 > Could you look into improving support for this within the driver itself in > DPDK? > > Thanks, > Emma > > <snip> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
