RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Brown, Aaron F]

> From: Alexander Duyck [mailto:alexander.du...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 11:07 AM
> To: Gomes, Vinicius <vinicius.go...@intel.com>
> Cc: Brown, Aaron F <aaron.f.br...@intel.com>; intel-wired-
> l...@lists.osuosl.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus
> <jesus.sanchez-palen...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC
> address support for ethtool nftuple filters
> 
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Vinicius Costa Gomes
> <vinicius.go...@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Alexander Duyck <alexander.du...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Brown, Aaron F
> <aaron.f.br...@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
> >>>> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
> >>>> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
> >>>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus  >>>> palen...@intel.com>
> >>>> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC
> address
> >>>> support for ethtool nftuple filters
> >>>>
> >>>> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
> >>>> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
> >>>>
> >>>> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
> >>>> characterized by these examples:
> >>>>
> >>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
> >>>> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
> >>>> to the RX queue 0)
> >>>>
> >>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
> >>>> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
> >>>> the RX queue 3)
> >>>
> >>> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set
> the rx filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the 
> packets to
> the queue I request.
> >>>
> >>> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be
> effected by setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on
> rx_queue 0 with or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example one
> seems to work at first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing the 
> filter to
> "action 1" does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and i354 ports the
> packets are spread across the rx_queues with or without the filter set.
> >>
> >> Do any of the other parts actually support this functionality? I don't
> >> think they do.
> >
> > From what I can see, the only other part that supports queue steering (by
> MAC
> > addresses) is the 82575. But as I don't have any of those handy, making
> > it work only for the i210 seems more reasonable, to avoid getting into
> > this situation again.
> 
> That sounds good to me. What you might do is add a comment explaining
> that this is only supported on 82575 and i210 wherever you put the
> check that limits this. Then if we have time for the
> development/validation efforts, or someone in the community does they
> could take it upon themselves to enable and test it for 82575.
> 
> I have done similar things in the past. As long as it is clear that
> the reason why we limited it to i210 is mostly because of
> development/validation resources somebody else can come along and
> enable it if they have the resources and time to invest in doing so.

I do have a few of 82575 NICs in my lab and am perfectly willing to test them 
on whatever you come up with.  But I don't believe it is a common part at all 
so have no qualms with limiting it to i210.

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Alexander Duyck]

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Vinicius Costa Gomes
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Alexander Duyck  writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Brown, Aaron F  
>> wrote:
 From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
 Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
 Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
 To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
 Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus >>> palen...@intel.com>
 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
 support for ethtool nftuple filters

 This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
 packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.

 In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
 characterized by these examples:

 $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
 (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
 to the RX queue 0)

 $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
 (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
 the RX queue 3)
>>>
>>> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set the 
>>> rx filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the packets 
>>> to the queue I request.
>>>
>>> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be 
>>> effected by setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on 
>>> rx_queue 0 with or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example 
>>> one seems to work at first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing 
>>> the filter to "action 1" does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and 
>>> i354 ports the packets are spread across the rx_queues with or without the 
>>> filter set.
>>
>> Do any of the other parts actually support this functionality? I don't
>> think they do.
>
> From what I can see, the only other part that supports queue steering (by MAC
> addresses) is the 82575. But as I don't have any of those handy, making
> it work only for the i210 seems more reasonable, to avoid getting into
> this situation again.

That sounds good to me. What you might do is add a comment explaining
that this is only supported on 82575 and i210 wherever you put the
check that limits this. Then if we have time for the
development/validation efforts, or someone in the community does they
could take it upon themselves to enable and test it for 82575.

I have done similar things in the past. As long as it is clear that
the reason why we limited it to i210 is mostly because of
development/validation resources somebody else can come along and
enable it if they have the resources and time to invest in doing so.

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Vinicius Costa Gomes]

Hi,

Alexander Duyck  writes:

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Brown, Aaron F  
> wrote:
>>> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
>>> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
>>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus >> palen...@intel.com>
>>> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
>>> support for ethtool nftuple filters
>>>
>>> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
>>> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
>>>
>>> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
>>> characterized by these examples:
>>>
>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
>>> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
>>> to the RX queue 0)
>>>
>>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
>>> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
>>> the RX queue 3)
>>
>> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set the 
>> rx filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the packets 
>> to the queue I request.
>>
>> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be effected 
>> by setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on rx_queue 
>> 0 with or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example one seems 
>> to work at first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing the filter to 
>> "action 1" does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and i354 ports the 
>> packets are spread across the rx_queues with or without the filter set.
>
> Do any of the other parts actually support this functionality? I don't
> think they do.

>From what I can see, the only other part that supports queue steering (by MAC
addresses) is the 82575. But as I don't have any of those handy, making
it work only for the i210 seems more reasonable, to avoid getting into
this situation again.

>
> What we might look at doing instead of trying to add support for other
> parts would be to explicitly limit this functionality to the i210
> since if I am not mistaken this may be a feature only available in
> that hardware.

Sounds good to me.

>
> Thanks.
>
> - Alex


Cheers,
--
Vinicius

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Alexander Duyck]

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Brown, Aaron F  wrote:
>> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
>> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
>> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus > palen...@intel.com>
>> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
>> support for ethtool nftuple filters
>>
>> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
>> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
>>
>> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
>> characterized by these examples:
>>
>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
>> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
>> to the RX queue 0)
>>
>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
>> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
>> the RX queue 3)
>
> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set the rx 
> filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the packets to 
> the queue I request.
>
> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be effected 
> by setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on rx_queue 0 
> with or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example one seems to 
> work at first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing the filter to 
> "action 1" does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and i354 ports the 
> packets are spread across the rx_queues with or without the filter set.

Do any of the other parts actually support this functionality? I don't
think they do.

What we might look at doing instead of trying to add support for other
parts would be to explicitly limit this functionality to the i210
since if I am not mistaken this may be a feature only available in
that hardware.

Thanks.

- Alex

RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Vinicius Costa Gomes]

Hi,

"Brown, Aaron F"  writes:

>> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
>> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
>> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus > palen...@intel.com>
>> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
>> support for ethtool nftuple filters
>> 
>> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
>> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
>> 
>> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
>> characterized by these examples:
>> 
>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
>> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
>> to the RX queue 0)
>> 
>> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
>> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
>> the RX queue 3)
>
> This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set
> the rx filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the
> packets to the queue I request.
>

For the i211, it seems that the datasheet is slightly misleading: it has
the QSEL bit documented on the RAH registers, but the queue selection
bits are not mentioned, so it really seems that queue selection won't
work for this controller.

For the other cases (in a quick search I couldn't find the i354
datasheet), the semantics changes, it's more about pool selection than
queue selection, and it depends on vfs_allocated_count (>= 1) and the
number of rss_queues (<= 1) to get to the state where setting the queue
via filters would have the expected effect.

> With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be
> effected by setting the filter. In the case of i211 the rx packets
> stay on rx_queue 0 with or without an ether src or dst filter. The
> first example one seems to work at first since it's directing to queue
> 0, but changing the filter to "action 1" does not change the behavior.
> With the i350 and i354 ports the packets are spread across the
> rx_queues with or without the filter set.
>

So, what I am thinking is: make it an error selecting any queue
different than zero (this is expected to work for all controllers, and
it's what will be called when the user does something like 'ip maddr'),
for controller different than the i210. Later, if/when this feature is
needed for other controllers we can extend the checks.

Does this make sense?


Thanks,
--
Vinicius

RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address support for ethtool nftuple filters

[Brown, Aaron F]

> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-boun...@osuosl.org] On
> Behalf Of Vinicius Costa Gomes
> Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 4:37 PM
> To: intel-wired-...@lists.osuosl.org
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sanchez-Palencia, Jesus  palen...@intel.com>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 6/8] igb: Add MAC address
> support for ethtool nftuple filters
> 
> This adds the capability of configuring the queue steering of arriving
> packets based on their source and destination MAC addresses.
> 
> In practical terms this adds support for the following use cases,
> characterized by these examples:
> 
> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether dst aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa action 0
> (this will direct packets with destination address "aa:aa:aa:aa:aa:aa"
> to the RX queue 0)
> 
> $ ethtool -N eth0 flow-type ether src 44:44:44:44:44:44 action 3
> (this will direct packets with source address "44:44:44:44:44:44" to
> the RX queue 3)

This seems to work fine on i210, and the patch series allows me to set the rx 
filters on the i350, i354 and i211, but it is not directing the packets to the 
queue I request.

With the exception of i210 the rx_queues number does not seem to be effected by 
setting the filter.  In the case of i211 the rx packets stay on rx_queue 0 with 
or without an ether src or dst filter.  The first example one seems to work at 
first since it's directing to queue 0, but changing the filter to "action 1" 
does not change the behavior.  With the i350 and i354 ports the packets are 
spread across the rx_queues with or without the filter set.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Vinicius Costa Gomes 
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c | 35
> 
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
> index 94fc9a4bed8b..3f98299d4cd0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_ethtool.c
> @@ -2494,6 +2494,23 @@ static int igb_get_ethtool_nfc_entry(struct
> igb_adapter *adapter,
>   fsp->h_ext.vlan_tci = rule->filter.vlan_tci;
>   fsp->m_ext.vlan_tci = htons(VLAN_PRIO_MASK);
>   }
> + if (rule->filter.match_flags &
> IGB_FILTER_FLAG_DST_MAC_ADDR) {
> + ether_addr_copy(fsp->h_u.ether_spec.h_dest,
> + rule->filter.dst_addr);
> + /* As we only support matching by the full
> +  * mask, return the mask to userspace
> +  */
> + eth_broadcast_addr(fsp->m_u.ether_spec.h_dest);
> + }
> + if (rule->filter.match_flags &
> IGB_FILTER_FLAG_SRC_MAC_ADDR) {
> + ether_addr_copy(fsp->h_u.ether_spec.h_source,
> + rule->filter.src_addr);
> + /* As we only support matching by the full
> +  * mask, return the mask to userspace
> +  */
> + eth_broadcast_addr(fsp-
> >m_u.ether_spec.h_source);
> + }
> +
>   return 0;
>   }
>   return -EINVAL;
> @@ -2932,10 +2949,6 @@ static int igb_add_ethtool_nfc_entry(struct
> igb_adapter *adapter,
>   if ((fsp->flow_type & ~FLOW_EXT) != ETHER_FLOW)
>   return -EINVAL;
> 
> - if (fsp->m_u.ether_spec.h_proto != ETHER_TYPE_FULL_MASK &&
> - fsp->m_ext.vlan_tci != htons(VLAN_PRIO_MASK))
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
>   input = kzalloc(sizeof(*input), GFP_KERNEL);
>   if (!input)
>   return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -2945,6 +2958,20 @@ static int igb_add_ethtool_nfc_entry(struct
> igb_adapter *adapter,
>   input->filter.match_flags = IGB_FILTER_FLAG_ETHER_TYPE;
>   }
> 
> + /* Only support matching addresses by the full mask */
> + if (is_broadcast_ether_addr(fsp->m_u.ether_spec.h_source)) {
> + input->filter.match_flags |=
> IGB_FILTER_FLAG_SRC_MAC_ADDR;
> + ether_addr_copy(input->filter.src_addr,
> + fsp->h_u.ether_spec.h_source);
> + }
> +
> + /* Only support matching addresses by the full mask */
> + if (is_broadcast_ether_addr(fsp->m_u.ether_spec.h_dest)) {
> + input->filter.match_flags |=
> IGB_FILTER_FLAG_DST_MAC_ADDR;
> + ether_addr_copy(input->filter.dst_addr,
> + fsp->h_u.ether_spec.h_dest);
> + }
> +
>   if ((fsp->flow_type & FLOW_EXT) && fsp->m_ext.vlan_tci) {
>   if (fsp->m_ext.vlan_tci != htons(VLAN_PRIO_MASK)) {
>   err = -EINVAL;
> --
> 2.16.2
> 
> ___
> Intel-wired-lan mailing list
> intel-wired-...@osuosl.org
> https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan