On 18-10-09 06:08:32, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 07:22:03PM +0800, Xiaoyu Min wrote:
> > On 18-10-02 04:19:00, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 03:21:04PM +0800, Xiaoyu Min wrote:
> > > > On 18-09-29 07:03:33, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 07:51:06PM +0800, Xiaoyu Min wrote:
> > > > > > Offload the following rte_flow actions by inserting accordingly
> > > > > > E-Switch rules via TC Flower driver
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC
> > > > > > - RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you put an example command of testpmd for the reference?
> > > > >
> > > > Sure, I'll add.
> > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiaoyu Min <jack...@mellanox.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > This patch bases on Rahul Lakkireddy's patchs[1][2] and
> > > > > > Yongseok Koh's patchset [3]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/45191/
> > > > > > [2] https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/45192/
> > > > > > [3] https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/list/?series=1474
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile | 5 +
> > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5/meson.build | 2 +
> > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h | 6 +
> > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c | 356
> > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > 4 files changed, 369 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile b/drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile
> > > > > > index ca1de9f21..49b95e78e 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/Makefile
> > > > > > @@ -346,6 +346,11 @@ mlx5_autoconf.h.new:
> > > > > > $(RTE_SDK)/buildtools/auto-config-h.sh
> > > > > > linux/tc_act/tc_vlan.h \
> > > > > > enum TCA_VLAN_PUSH_VLAN_PRIORITY \
> > > > > > $(AUTOCONF_OUTPUT)
> > > > > > + $Q sh -- '$<' '$@' \
> > > > > > + HAVE_TC_ACT_PEDIT \
> > > > > > + linux/tc_act/tc_pedit.h \
> > > > > > + enum TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_UDP \
> > > > > > + $(AUTOCONF_OUTPUT)
> > > > > > $Q sh -- '$<' '$@' \
> > > > > > HAVE_SUPPORTED_40000baseKR4_Full \
> > > > > > /usr/include/linux/ethtool.h \
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/meson.build
> > > > > > b/drivers/net/mlx5/meson.build
> > > > > > index fd93ac162..ef6a85101 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/meson.build
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/meson.build
> > > > > > @@ -182,6 +182,8 @@ if build
> > > > > > 'TCA_FLOWER_KEY_VLAN_ETH_TYPE' ],
> > > > > > [ 'HAVE_TC_ACT_VLAN', 'linux/tc_act/tc_vlan.h',
> > > > > > 'TCA_VLAN_PUSH_VLAN_PRIORITY' ],
> > > > > > + [ 'HAVE_TC_ACT_PEDIT', 'linux/tc_act/tc_pedit.h',
> > > > > > + 'TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_UDP' ],
> > > > > > [ 'HAVE_RDMA_NL_NLDEV', 'rdma/rdma_netlink.h',
> > > > > > 'RDMA_NL_NLDEV' ],
> > > > > > [ 'HAVE_RDMA_NLDEV_CMD_GET', 'rdma/rdma_netlink.h',
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > > > > > b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > > > > > index 10d700a7f..be182a643 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > > > > > @@ -87,6 +87,12 @@
> > > > > > #define MLX5_ACTION_OF_PUSH_VLAN (1u << 8)
> > > > > > #define MLX5_ACTION_OF_SET_VLAN_VID (1u << 9)
> > > > > > #define MLX5_ACTION_OF_SET_VLAN_PCP (1u << 10)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC (1u << 11)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_DST (1u << 12)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_SRC (1u << 13)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_DST (1u << 14)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_SRC (1u << 15)
> > > > > > +#define MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_DST (1u << 16)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /* possible L3 layers protocols filtering. */
> > > > > > #define MLX5_IP_PROTOCOL_TCP 6
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c
> > > > > > b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c
> > > > > > index 14376188e..85c92f369 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_tcf.c
> > > > > > @@ -53,6 +53,62 @@ struct tc_vlan {
> > > > > >
> > > > > > #endif /* HAVE_TC_ACT_VLAN */
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +#ifdef HAVE_TC_ACT_PEDIT
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +#include <linux/tc_act/tc_pedit.h>
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +#else /* HAVE_TC_ACT_VLAN */
> > > > > > +enum {
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_UNSPEC,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_TM,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_PARMS,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_PAD,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_PARMS_EX,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEYS_EX,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX,
> > > > > > + __TCA_PEDIT_MAX
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +enum {
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HTYPE = 1,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD = 2,
> > > > > > + __TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_MAX
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +enum pedit_header_type {
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_NETWORK = 0,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_ETH = 1,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_IP4 = 2,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_IP6 = 3,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_TCP = 4,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_UDP = 5,
> > > > > > + __PEDIT_HDR_TYPE_MAX,
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +enum pedit_cmd {
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_SET = 0,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_ADD = 1,
> > > > > > + __PEDIT_CMD_MAX,
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +struct tc_pedit_key {
> > > > > > + __u32 mask; /* AND */
> > > > > > + __u32 val; /*XOR */
> > > > > > + __u32 off; /*offset */
> > > > > > + __u32 at;
> > > > > > + __u32 offmask;
> > > > > > + __u32 shift;
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +struct tc_pedit_sel {
> > > > > > + tc_gen;
> > > > > > + unsigned char nkeys;
> > > > > > + unsigned char flags;
> > > > > > + struct tc_pedit_key keys[0];
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +#endif /* HAVE_TC_ACT_VLAN */
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > /* Normally found in linux/netlink.h. */
> > > > > > #ifndef NETLINK_CAP_ACK
> > > > > > #define NETLINK_CAP_ACK 10
> > > > > > @@ -153,6 +209,14 @@ struct tc_vlan {
> > > > > > #define IPV6_ADDR_LEN 16
> > > > > > #endif
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +#ifndef IPV4_ADDR_LEN
> > > > > > +#define IPV4_ADDR_LEN 4
> > > > > > +#endif
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +#ifndef TP_PORT_LEN
> > > > > > +#define TP_PORT_LEN 2 /* Transport Port (UDP/TCP) Length */
> > > > > > +#endif
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > /** Empty masks for known item types. */
> > > > > > static const union {
> > > > > > struct rte_flow_item_port_id port_id;
> > > > > > @@ -227,6 +291,220 @@ struct flow_tcf_ptoi {
> > > > > >
> > > > > > #define MLX5_TCF_FATE_ACTIONS (MLX5_ACTION_DROP |
> > > > > > MLX5_ACTION_PORT_ID)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +#define IS_MODIFY_ACTION(act_) ({typeof(act_) act = (act_); \
> > > > > > + ((act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC || \
> > > > > > + (act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST || \
> > > > > > + (act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC || \
> > > > > > + (act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST || \
> > > > > > + (act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC || \
> > > > > > + (act) == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST) ? \
> > > > > > + 1 : 0; })
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason why you need this complex multi-conditional macro is that
> > > > > RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_* isn't a bitmask. But, as this actions will be
> > > > > converted
> > > > > to MLX5_ACTION_* which is a bitmask, you can use that instead. Then,
> > > > > this
> > > > > would be enough to be:
> > > > >
> > > > > #define MLX5_TCF_SET_ACTIONS \
> > > > > (MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC | ...)
> > > > >
> > > > > And in the flow_tcf_validate() below,
> > > > > if (action_flags & MLX5_TCF_SET_ACTIONS) {
> > > > > ...
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > Well, I did consider using bitmask but action_flags is an _accumulated_
> > > > variable,
> > > > records all the actions parsed so far.
> > > > But, here, I need to know what is the _current_ action and whether it
> > > > belongs to modify
> > > > actions. If using bitmask, Looks like a new variable (i.e
> > > > current_action) needed (?)
> > > >
> > > > case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > current_action = MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC;
> > > > .....
> > > >
> > > > if (current_action & MLX5_TCF_SET_ACTIONS) ...
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > action_flags |= current_action;
> > > >
> > > > I feel more code change needed or you think it's worth?
> > >
> > > Understood what you meant.
> > > Please see my comment below in the flow_tcf_validate().
> > >
> > > > > And please note that I'm going to rename MLX5_ACTION_* to
> > > > > MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_*.
> > > > > Please refer to "net/mlx5: rename flow macros" in PR #885. You might
> > > > > need to
> > > > > rebase it again.
> > > > >
> > > > Sure, I'll rebase on it
> > > >
> > > > > > +#define MAX_PEDIT_KEYS (128)
> > > > > > +#define SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL (4)
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +struct pedit_key_ex {
> > > > > > + enum pedit_header_type htype;
> > > > > > + enum pedit_cmd cmd;
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +struct pedit_parser {
> > > > > > + struct tc_pedit_sel sel;
> > > > > > + struct tc_pedit_key keys[MAX_PEDIT_KEYS];
> > > > > > + struct pedit_key_ex keys_ex[MAX_PEDIT_KEYS];
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(const uint64_t size)
> > > > >
> > > > > Please add documentation by comment for every funcs you add.
> > > > > Refer to the other existing ones for formality.
> > > > >
> > > > Sure!
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + int keys = (size / SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL) +
> > > > > > + ((size % SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL) ? 1 : 0);
> > > > >
> > > > > Indentation.
> > > > >
> > > > Will fix it
> > > > > > + return keys;
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +static void
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_tp_port(const struct rte_flow_action
> > > > > > *actions,
> > > > > > + struct pedit_parser *p_parser,
> > > > > > + uint64_t item_flags)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + int idx = p_parser->sel.nkeys;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + if (item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_UDP)
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].htype =
> > > > > > TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_UDP;
> > > > > > + if (item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_TCP)
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].htype =
> > > > > > TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_TCP;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].cmd = TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_SET;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].off =
> > > > > > + actions->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST ? 2 :
> > > > > > 0;
> > > > >
> > > > > assert(offsetof(struct tcp_hdr, src_port) ==
> > > > > offsetof(struct udp_hdr, src_port));
> > > > > assert(offsetof(struct tcp_hdr, dst_port) ==
> > > > > offsetof(struct udp_hdr, dst_port));
> > > > > p_parser->keys[idx].off =
> > > > > actions->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC ?
> > > > > offsetof(struct tcp_hdr, src_port) :
> > > > > offsetof(struct tcp_hdr, dst_port);
> > > > >
> > > > > assert() is just to be informative.
> > > > > And how about src first like others below?
> > > > >
> > > > Yes, I will update above.
> > > >
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].mask = 0xFFFF0000;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].val = ((const struct rte_flow_action_set_tp
> > > > > > *)
> > > > > > + actions->conf)->port;
> > > > >
> > > > > Assigning 2B to 4B big-endian stroage? Doesn't look consistent with
> > > > > the mask
> > > > > above - 0xffff0000.
> > > > >
> > > > So it should be as following ?
> > > > p_parser->keys[idx].val = (__u32)((const struct rte_flow_action_set_tp
> > > > *))
> > > > actions->conf)->port;
> > >
> > > You can figure it out by actual tests but I think the following would be
> > > right.
> > > p_parser->keys[idx].val =
> > > rte_cpu_to_be_32(((const struct rte_flow_action_set_tp *)
> > > actions->conf)->port);
> > >
> > > Please verify it by testing anyway.
> > >
> > No, it doesn't work correctly if it's converted to BE.
> > As my understanding the Netlink message should be expressed in host-byte
> > order (?)
>
> As far as I know rte_flow takes network-byte order for args and tcf na msg
> takes
> host-byte order. Please refer to the "override_na_vlan_id:" in
> mlx5_flow_tcf.c,
> rte_be_to_cpu_16() is used there. I'm still confusing why the mask is
> 0xffff0000 above. Please make sure your code works correctly by multiple test
> cases and hopefully I can hear clear explanation what is right and why.
>
Hey Koh,
1. yes, rte_flow takes network-byte order. Here the 'port' is already converted
to
BE by testpmd.
If the rte_be_to_cpu_16 is used just like "override_na_vlan_id" does the result
is not correct. Things like TC-pedit takes network-byte order.
2. For the mask, honestly, I'm not very clear. The only reference is from [1]
and
my verification by using TC show command.
[1]
https://www.netdevconf.org/2.1/slides/apr7/tc-workshop/vadai-tc-workshop-update.pdf
> > > > > > + p_parser->sel.nkeys = (++idx);
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +static void
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_ipv6_addr(const struct rte_flow_action
> > > > > > *actions,
> > > > > > + struct pedit_parser *p_parser)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + int idx = p_parser->sel.nkeys;
> > > > > > + int keys = flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(IPV6_ADDR_LEN);
> > > > > > + int off_base =
> > > > > > + actions->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC ? 8
> > > > > > : 24;
> > > > >
> > > > > offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, src_addr) :
> > > > > offsetof(struct ipv6_hdr, dst_addr);
> > > > >
> > > > Got it!
> > > > > > + const struct rte_flow_action_set_ipv6 *conf =
> > > > > > + (const struct rte_flow_action_set_ipv6 *)actions->conf;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + for (int i = 0; i < keys; i++, idx++) {
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].htype =
> > > > > > TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_IP6;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].cmd = TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_SET;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].off = off_base + i *
> > > > > > SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].mask = ~UINT32_MAX;
> > > > > > + memcpy(&p_parser->keys[idx].val,
> > > > > > + conf->ipv6_addr + i * SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL,
> > > > > > + SZ_PEDIT_KEY_VAL);
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + p_parser->sel.nkeys += keys;
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +static void
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_ipv4_addr(const struct rte_flow_action
> > > > > > *actions,
> > > > >
> > > > > How about getting rte_flow_action_set_ipv4 instead of rte_flow_action?
> > > > > Same comment for ipv6 and tp_port.
> > > > >
> > > > What's the benefit by using rte_flow_action_set_ipv4 and how I know it's
> > > > for src or dst address ?
> > >
> > > Just to make the function neat but I overlooked that you still need
> > > actions->type. Please disregard my previous comment.
> > >
> > OK~
> > > > > > + struct pedit_parser *p_parser)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + int idx = p_parser->sel.nkeys;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].htype = TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HDR_TYPE_IP4;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys_ex[idx].cmd = TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_SET;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].off =
> > > > > > + (actions->type == RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC ?
> > > > > > 12 : 16);
> > > > >
> > > > > offsetof(struct ipv4_hdr, src_addr) :
> > > > > offsetof(struct ipv4_hdr, dst_addr);
> > > > >
> > > > Got it!
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].mask = ~UINT32_MAX;
> > > > > > + p_parser->keys[idx].val =
> > > > > > + ((const struct rte_flow_action_set_ipv4 *)
> > > > > > + actions->conf)->ipv4_addr;
> > > > > > + p_parser->sel.nkeys = (++idx);
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_create_pedit_mnl_msg(struct nlmsghdr *nl,
> > > > > > + const struct rte_flow_action **actions,
> > > > > > + uint64_t item_flags)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + struct pedit_parser p_parser;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + memset(&p_parser, 0, sizeof(p_parser));
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_put_strz(nl, TCA_ACT_KIND, "pedit");
> > > > > > + struct nlattr *na_act_options = mnl_attr_nest_start(nl,
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > TCA_ACT_OPTIONS);
> > > > > > + /* all modify header actions should be in one tc-pedit action */
> > > > > > + for (; (*actions)->type != RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_END;
> > > > > > (*actions)++) {
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems that you want to aggregate all the pedit actions and form a
> > > > > single
> > > > > na attr. But what if rte_flow_action_set_* are not contiguous? E.g.
> > > > >
> > > > > flow create ... actions set1 / set2 / port_id / set3 / end
> > > > >
> > > > > Then, it would have two pedit na attrs. Is that okay?
> > > > > Or, need to think about another way?
> > > > >
> > > > > Same will happen in flow_tcf_get_pedit_actions_size().
> > > > >
> > > > It's OK if we have more than one pedit na attrs.
> > > > _BUT_ only last pedit take effect based on my experiment
> > >
> > > Then, shouldn't we give some warning to user in validation? So that user
> > > can
> > > have right expectation and reorder the actions as their intention like:
> > > flow create ... actions set1 / set2 / set3 / port_id / end
> > >
> > > Otherwise set1 and set2 will be lost according to your comment.
> > >
> > I prefer to give error to user in validation because this is simple.
>
> Good.
>
> > > Or, how about making PMD do the right thing. I mean, even if the set
> > > actions are
> > > scattered, PMD can collect it and apply in a single na attr?
> > >
> > My feeling is the above approach will be (become) complex. It looks like we
> > introduce
> > new functionality which re-order all actions, something like rss_expand.
>
> +1
>
> > > > > > + switch ((*actions)->type) {
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST:
> > > > > > + flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_ipv4_addr(*actions,
> > > > > > &p_parser);
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST:
> > > > > > + flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_ipv6_addr(*actions,
> > > > > > &p_parser);
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > > > > + flow_tcf_pedit_key_set_tp_port(*actions,
> > > > > > + &p_parser,
> > > > > > item_flags);
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + default:
> > > > > > + goto pedit_mnl_msg_done;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > +pedit_mnl_msg_done:
> > > > > > + p_parser.sel.action = TC_ACT_PIPE;
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_put(nl, TCA_PEDIT_PARMS_EX,
> > > > > > + sizeof(p_parser.sel) +
> > > > > > + p_parser.sel.nkeys * sizeof(struct
> > > > > > tc_pedit_key),
> > > > > > + &p_parser);
> > > > > > + struct nlattr *na_pedit_keys = mnl_attr_nest_start(nl,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEYS_EX |
> > > > > > NLA_F_NESTED);
> > > > > > + for (int i = 0; i < p_parser.sel.nkeys; i++) {
> > > > > > + struct nlattr *na_pedit_key = mnl_attr_nest_start(nl,
> > > > > > + TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX |
> > > > > > NLA_F_NESTED);
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_put_u16(nl, TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_HTYPE,
> > > > > > + p_parser.keys_ex[i].htype);
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_put_u16(nl, TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD,
> > > > > > + p_parser.keys_ex[i].cmd);
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_nest_end(nl, na_pedit_key);
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_nest_end(nl, na_pedit_keys);
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_nest_end(nl, na_act_options);
> > > > > > + (*actions)--;
> > > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +/**
> > > > > > + * Calculate max memory size of one TC-pedit actions.
> > > > > > + * One TC-pedit action can contain set of keys each defining
> > > > > > + * a rewrite element (rte_flow action)
> > > > > > + *
> > > > > > + * @param[in] actions
> > > > > > + * actions specification.
> > > > > > + * @param[inout] action_flags
> > > > > > + * actions flags
> > > > > > + * @param[inout] size
> > > > > > + * accumulated size
> > > > > > + * @return
> > > > > > + * Max memory size of one TC-pedit action
> > > > > > + */
> > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > +flow_tcf_get_pedit_actions_size(const struct rte_flow_action
> > > > > > **actions,
> > > > > > + uint64_t *action_flags)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + int pedit_size = 0;
> > > > > > + int keys = 0;
> > > > > > + uint64_t flags = 0;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + pedit_size += SZ_NLATTR_NEST + /* na_act_index. */
> > > > > > + SZ_NLATTR_STRZ_OF("pedit") +
> > > > > > + SZ_NLATTR_NEST; /* TCA_ACT_OPTIONS. */
> > > > > > + for (; (*actions)->type != RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_END;
> > > > > > (*actions)++) {
> > > > > > + switch ((*actions)->type) {
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(IPV4_ADDR_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST:
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(IPV4_ADDR_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC:
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(IPV6_ADDR_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST:
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(IPV6_ADDR_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC:
> > > > > > + /* TCP is as same as UDP */
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(TP_PORT_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > > > > + /* TCP is as same as UDP */
> > > > > > + keys += flow_tcf_calc_pedit_keys(TP_PORT_LEN);
> > > > > > + flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + default:
> > > > > > + goto get_pedit_action_size_done;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > +get_pedit_action_size_done:
> > > > > > + /* TCA_PEDIT_PARAMS_EX */
> > > > > > + pedit_size += SZ_NLATTR_DATA_OF(sizeof(struct tc_pedit_sel) +
> > > > > > + keys * sizeof(struct tc_pedit_key));
> > > > >
> > > > > > + pedit_size += SZ_NLATTR_NEST; /* TCA_PEDIT_KEYS */
> > > > > > + pedit_size += keys *
> > > > > > + /* TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX + HTYPE + CMD */
> > > > > > + (SZ_NLATTR_NEST + SZ_NLATTR_DATA_OF(2) +
> > > > > > SZ_NLATTR_DATA_OF(2));
> > > > > > + (*action_flags) |= flags;
> > > > > > + (*actions)--;
> > > > > > + return pedit_size;
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > /**
> > > > > > * Retrieve mask for pattern item.
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > @@ -430,6 +708,8 @@ flow_tcf_validate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > of_set_vlan_vid;
> > > > > > const struct rte_flow_action_of_set_vlan_pcp *
> > > > > > of_set_vlan_pcp;
> > > > > > + const struct rte_flow_action_set_ipv4 *set_ipv4;
> > > > > > + const struct rte_flow_action_set_ipv6 *set_ipv6;
> > > > > > } conf;
> > > > > > uint32_t item_flags = 0;
> > > > > > uint32_t action_flags = 0;
> > > > > > @@ -690,12 +970,64 @@ flow_tcf_validate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_OF_SET_VLAN_PCP:
> > > > > > action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_OF_SET_VLAN_PCP;
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_SRC;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > > > > + action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_DST;
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > default:
> > > > > > return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > > > > > actions,
> > > > > > "action not
> > > > > > supported");
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > + if (IS_MODIFY_ACTION(actions->type)) {
> > >
> > > This would be a redundant 'if' as classification is already done above.
> > > So, how
> > > about adding a goto label at the end of this code -
> > > 'err_no_action_conf:', and
> > > use goto above. E.g.,
> > >
> > > case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > action_flags |= MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_DST;
> > > if (!actions->conf)
> > > goto err_no_action_conf;
> > > break;
> > >
> > In some level I do agree with you it's redundant. But things like this kind
> > of
> > redundancy is not avoidable. I mean if we use "goto err_no_action_conf", the
> > "if (!actions->conf) goto err_no_action_conf" has to be repeated in each
> > "case"
> > which needs to check conf or you think it's acceptable ?
>
> But in your approach, the redundant check (IS_MODIFY_ACTION) is inside a loop
> and it has to be checked even if there's no 'set' action in the action list.
>
Yes, it will check very time. But I doubt it will impact performace
significantly.
Another thing bother me is, if taking 'goto' approach, beside the 'if
(!actions->conf)...',
at this moment, we also need to add 'if (set action is discontinued)' for
each modification case. I'm not sure if this will keep code clear
considering many repeated code there...
> > > And if I may, can I ask you to add the same to
> > > RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_PORT_ID?
> > >
> > Yes, I will add.
> > > > > > + if (!actions->conf)
> > > > > > + return rte_flow_error_set(error,
> > > > > > ENOTSUP,
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION_CONF,
> > > > > > + actions,
> > > > > > + "action configuration
> > > > > > not set");
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + if (action_flags &
> > > > > > + (MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_SRC | MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV4_DST)) {
> > > > > > + if (!(item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L3_IPV4))
> > > > > > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > > > > > + actions,
> > > > > > + "no ipv4 item found
> > > > > > in"
> > > > > > + " pattern");
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + if (action_flags &
> > > > > > + (MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_SRC | MLX5_ACTION_SET_IPV6_DST)) {
> > > > > > + if (!(item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L3_IPV6))
> > > > > > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > > > > > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > > > > > + actions,
> > > > > > + "no ipv6 item found in pattern");
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + if (action_flags & (MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_SRC |
> > > > > > MLX5_ACTION_SET_TP_DST)) {
> > > > > > + if (!(item_flags &
> > > > > > + (MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_UDP |
> > > > > > + MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_TCP)))
> > > > > > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > > > > > + actions,
> > > > > > + "no TCP/UDP item found
> > > > > > in"
> > > > > > + " pattern");
> > >
> > > All the errors you added, I think EINVAL would be a better fit?
> > >
> > Yes, EINVAL should be better.
> > > > > Isn't this 'set' action compatible with drop action? No point of
> > > > > modifying
> > > > > packet which will be dropped, isn't it?
> > > > >
> > > > Yes, you are absolutely right :-)
> > >
> > > I believe you'll add a validation code for that in the next version. :-)
> > >
> > Of course ;-)
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > @@ -840,6 +1172,15 @@ flow_tcf_get_actions_and_size(const struct
> > > > > > rte_flow_action actions[],
> > > > > > SZ_NLATTR_TYPE_OF(uint16_t) + /* VLAN
> > > > > > ID. */
> > > > > > SZ_NLATTR_TYPE_OF(uint8_t); /* VLAN
> > > > > > prio. */
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > > > > + size +=
> > > > > > flow_tcf_get_pedit_actions_size(&actions,
> > > > > > + &flags);
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > default:
> > > > > > DRV_LOG(WARNING,
> > > > > > "unsupported action %p type %d,"
> > > > > > @@ -998,6 +1339,7 @@ flow_tcf_translate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > struct mlx5_flow *dev_flow,
> > > > > > struct nlattr *na_flower_act;
> > > > > > struct nlattr *na_vlan_id = NULL;
> > > > > > struct nlattr *na_vlan_priority = NULL;
> > > > > > + uint64_t item_flags = 0;
> > > > > >
> > > > > > claim_nonzero(flow_tcf_build_ptoi_table(dev, ptoi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PTOI_TABLE_SZ_MAX(dev)));
> > > > > > @@ -1189,6 +1531,7 @@ flow_tcf_translate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > struct mlx5_flow *dev_flow,
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > > case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_UDP:
> > > > > > + item_flags |= MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_UDP;
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's add the same to the rest of items like flow_tcf_validate().
> > > > >
> > > > OK!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yongseok
> > > > >
> > > > > > mask.udp = flow_tcf_item_mask
> > > > > > (items, &rte_flow_item_udp_mask,
> > > > > > &flow_tcf_mask_supported.udp,
> > > > > > @@ -1218,6 +1561,7 @@ flow_tcf_translate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > struct mlx5_flow *dev_flow,
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > > case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_TCP:
> > > > > > + item_flags |= MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L4_TCP;
> > > > > > mask.tcp = flow_tcf_item_mask
> > > > > > (items, &rte_flow_item_tcp_mask,
> > > > > > &flow_tcf_mask_supported.tcp,
> > > > > > @@ -1368,6 +1712,18 @@ flow_tcf_translate(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > > > > > struct mlx5_flow *dev_flow,
> > > > > > conf.of_set_vlan_pcp->vlan_pcp;
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > break;
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV4_DST:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_IPV6_DST:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_SRC:
> > > > > > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TP_DST:
> > > > > > + na_act_index =
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_nest_start(nlh,
> > > > > > na_act_index_cur++);
> > > > > > + flow_tcf_create_pedit_mnl_msg(nlh,
> > > > > > + &actions,
> > > > > > item_flags);
> > > > > > + mnl_attr_nest_end(nlh, na_act_index);
> > > > > > + break;
> > > > > > default:
> > > > > > return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 2.17.1
> > > > > >
