> On May 14, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Ophir Munk <ophi...@mellanox.com> wrote:
>
> Running testpmd command "flow isolae <port> 0" (i.e. disabling flow
> isolation) followed by command "flow isolate <port> 1" (i.e. enabling
> flow isolation) may result in a TAP error:
> PMD: Kernel refused TC filter rule creation (17): File exists
>
> Root cause analysis: when disabling flow isolation we keep the local
> rule to redirect packets on TX (TAP_REMOTE_TX index) while we add it
> again when enabling flow isolation. As a result this rule is added
> two times in a row which results in "File exists" error.
> The fix is to identify the "File exists" error and silently ignore it.
>
> Another issue occurs when enabling isolation mode several times in a
> raw in which case the same tc rules are added consecutively and
> rte_flow structs are added to a linked list before removing the
> previous rte_flow structs.
> The fix is to act upon isolation mode command only when there is a
> change from "0" to "1" (or vice versa).
>
> Fixes: f503d2694825 ("net/tap: support flow API isolated mode")
> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>
> Reviewed-by: Raslan Darawsheh <rasl...@mellanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ophir Munk <ophi...@mellanox.com>
> ---
> v1:
> initial release
> v2:
> 1. Updates based on Keith Wiles review
> 2. Do not empty list of implicit TC rules (role back to legacy implementation)
> to ensure TC implicit rules cleanup during implicit rules flushing
>
> drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c | 24 ++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c b/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
> index aab9eef..6b60e6d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tap/tap_flow.c
> @@ -1568,10 +1568,14 @@ tap_flow_isolate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> {
> struct pmd_internals *pmd = dev->data->dev_private;
>
> + /* normalize 'set' variable to contain 0 or 1 values */
> if (set)
> - pmd->flow_isolate = 1;
> - else
> - pmd->flow_isolate = 0;
> + set = 1;
> + /* if already in the right isolation mode - nothing to do */
> + if ((set ^ pmd->flow_isolate) == 0)
> + return 0;
> + /* mark the isolation mode for tap_flow_implicit_create() */
> + pmd->flow_isolate = set;
> /*
> * If netdevice is there, setup appropriate flow rules immediately.
> * Otherwise it will be set when bringing up the netdevice (tun_alloc).
> @@ -1579,20 +1583,20 @@ tap_flow_isolate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> if (!pmd->rxq[0].fd)
> return 0;
> if (set) {
> - struct rte_flow *flow;
> + struct rte_flow *remote_flow;
>
> while (1) {
> - flow = LIST_FIRST(&pmd->implicit_flows);
> - if (!flow)
> + remote_flow = LIST_FIRST(&pmd->implicit_flows);
> + if (!remote_flow)
> break;
> /*
> * Remove all implicit rules on the remote.
> * Keep the local rule to redirect packets on TX.
> * Keep also the last implicit local rule: ISOLATE.
> */
> - if (flow->msg.t.tcm_ifindex == pmd->if_index)
> + if (remote_flow->msg.t.tcm_ifindex == pmd->if_index)
> break;
> - if (tap_flow_destroy_pmd(pmd, flow, NULL) < 0)
> + if (tap_flow_destroy_pmd(pmd, remote_flow, NULL) < 0)
> goto error;
> }
> /* Switch the TC rule according to pmd->flow_isolate */
> @@ -1739,8 +1743,8 @@ int tap_flow_implicit_create(struct pmd_internals *pmd,
> }
> err = tap_nl_recv_ack(pmd->nlsk_fd);
> if (err < 0) {
> - /* Silently ignore re-entering remote promiscuous rule */
> - if (errno == EEXIST && idx == TAP_REMOTE_PROMISC)
> + /* Silently ignore re-entering existing rule */
> + if (errno == EEXIST)
> goto success;
> TAP_LOG(ERR,
> "Kernel refused TC filter rule creation (%d): %s",
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Looks good.
Acked By: Keith Wiles<keith.wi...@intel.com>
Regards,
Keith
