On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 10:53 AM, John Fastabend
wrote:
> On 16-07-26 09:08 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> About RX filtering, there is an ongoing effort in DPDK to write an API
>>> which could leverage most of the hardware cap
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:53:05 -0700
John Fastabend wrote:
> On 16-07-26 09:08 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> About RX filtering, there is an ongoing effort in DPDK to write an API
> >> which could leverage most of the ha
On 16-07-26 09:08 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> About RX filtering, there is an ongoing effort in DPDK to write an API
>> which could leverage most of the hardware capabilities of any NICs:
>> https://rawgit.com/6WIND/rte_fl
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Thomas Monjalon
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> About RX filtering, there is an ongoing effort in DPDK to write an API
> which could leverage most of the hardware capabilities of any NICs:
> https://rawgit.com/6WIND/rte_flow/master/rte_flow.html
> http://thread.gm
Hi,
About RX filtering, there is an ongoing effort in DPDK to write an API
which could leverage most of the hardware capabilities of any NICs:
https://rawgit.com/6WIND/rte_flow/master/rte_flow.html
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.networking.dpdk.devel/43352
I understand that XDP
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:13:01 -0700
John Fastabend wrote:
> On 16-07-11 07:24 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 01:27:26PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:51:07 +0100
> >> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -070
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:13:01 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 16-07-11 07:24 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 01:27:26PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:51:07 +0100
> >> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -0700
On 16-07-11 07:24 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 01:27:26PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:51:07 +0100
>> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
The only distinction between VFs and queue gr
On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 01:27:26PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:51:07 +0100
> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> > > The only distinction between VFs and queue groupings on my side is VFs
> > > provide RSS where a
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:51:07 +0100
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> > The only distinction between VFs and queue groupings on my side is VFs
> > provide RSS where as queue groupings have to be selected explicitly.
> > In a programmable NIC world th
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:45:25 -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> The only distinction between VFs and queue groupings on my side is VFs
> provide RSS where as queue groupings have to be selected explicitly.
> In a programmable NIC world the distinction might be lost if a "RSS"
> program can be loaded int
On 16-07-08 09:07 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:19:43 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 14:44:53 +0100 Jakub Kicinski
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> If the goal is to just separate XDP traffic from non-
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:19:43 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 14:44:53 +0100 Jakub Kicinski
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > > If the goal is to just separate XDP traffic from non-XDP traffic
> > > > you could accomplish this
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 14:44:53 +0100 Jakub Kicinski
wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>
> > > If the goal is to just separate XDP traffic from non-XDP traffic
> > > you could accomplish this with a combination of SR-IOV/macvlan to
> > > separate the device queue
On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 19:22:12 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > If the goal is to just separate XDP traffic from non-XDP traffic you could
> > accomplish this with a combination of SR-IOV/macvlan to separate the device
> > queues into multiple netdevs and then run XDP on just one of the netdevs.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 09:05:29PM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 16-07-07 07:22 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:18:11PM +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
> >> Hi Jesper,
> >>
> >> I have done some previous work on proprietary systems where we
> >> used hardware to do
On 16-07-07 07:22 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:18:11PM +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
>> Hi Jesper,
>>
>> I have done some previous work on proprietary systems where we
>> used hardware to do the classification/parsing then passed a cookie to the
>> software which use
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:18:11PM +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
> Hi Jesper,
>
> I have done some previous work on proprietary systems where we used hardware
> to do the classification/parsing then passed a cookie to the software which
> used the cookie to lookup a program to run on the packe
On 16-07-07 10:53 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Jakub Kicinski
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 15:18:11 +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
>>> The other interesting thing would be to do more than just packet
>>> steering but actually run a more complete XDP program. Netronom
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 9:12 AM, Jakub Kicinski
wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 15:18:11 +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
>> The other interesting thing would be to do more than just packet
>> steering but actually run a more complete XDP program. Netronome
>> supports this right. The question I have th
On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 15:18:11 +, Fastabend, John R wrote:
> The other interesting thing would be to do more than just packet
> steering but actually run a more complete XDP program. Netronome
> supports this right. The question I have though is this a stacked of
> XDP programs one or more designa
an ; Or Gerlitz
; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Simon Horman
; Simon Horman ; Jakub Kicinski
; Edward Cree ; Fastabend,
John R
Subject: XDP seeking input from NIC hardware vendors
Would it make sense from a hardware point of view, to split the XDP eBPF
program into two stages.
Stage-1: Filter (restrict
Would it make sense from a hardware point of view, to split the XDP
eBPF program into two stages.
Stage-1: Filter (restricted eBPF / no-helper calls)
Stage-2: Program
Then the HW can choose to offload stage-1 "filter", and keep the
likely more advanced stage-2 on the kernel side. Do HW vendor
23 matches
Mail list logo
