Hi Koh,
PSB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yongseok Koh
> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 3:00 AM
> To: Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Shahaf Shuler <shah...@mellanox.com>; Matan Azrad
> <ma...@mellanox.com>; Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@mellanox.com>; Moti
> Haimovsky <mo...@mellanox.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] net/mlx5: add validation for Direct Rule E-Switch
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 09:12:32PM +0000, Ori Kam wrote:
> > Add validation logic for E-Switch using Direct Rules.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h | 2 +
> > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c | 39 +++++++
> > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h | 5 +
> > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c | 252
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 4 files changed, 287 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h
> > index 33a4127..8d63575 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h
> > @@ -412,6 +412,8 @@ int mlx5_ibv_device_to_pci_addr(const struct
> ibv_device *device,
> > unsigned int mlx5_dev_to_port_id(const struct rte_device *dev,
> > uint16_t *port_list,
> > unsigned int port_list_n);
> > +int mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(uint16_t port, uint16_t *es_domain_id,
> > + uint16_t *es_port_id);
> > int mlx5_sysfs_switch_info(unsigned int ifindex,
> > struct mlx5_switch_info *info);
> > bool mlx5_translate_port_name(const char *port_name_in,
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c
> b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c
> > index 3992918..c821772 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c
> > @@ -1376,6 +1376,45 @@ int mlx5_fw_version_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> char *fw_ver, size_t fw_size)
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > + * Get the e-switch domain id this port belongs to.
>
> E-Switch
Will fix.
>
> > + *
> > + * @param[in] port
> > + * Device port id.
> > + * @param[out] es_domain_id
> > + * e-switch domain id.
>
> E-Switch
> Please correct in the entire patchset.
>
> > + * @param[out] es_port_id
> > + * The port id of the port in the switch.
> > + *
> > + * @return
> > + * 0 on success, Negative error otherwise.
>
> From looking at the use-cases below, rte_errno must be set.
>
Will fix.
> > + */
> > +int
> > +mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(uint16_t port,
> > + uint16_t *es_domain_id, uint16_t *es_port_id)
> > +{
> > + struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> > + struct mlx5_priv *priv;
> > +
> > + if (port >= RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port];
> > + if (dev == NULL)
> > + return -ENODEV;
>
> dev is an l-value, it cannot be null.
> The above two checks can be replaced with rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port().
>
Will fix.
> > + if (!dev->device ||
> > + !dev->device->driver ||
> > + strcmp(dev->device->driver->name, MLX5_DRIVER_NAME))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Looks too paranoid. The function is just PMD-internal.
>
Will delete.
> > + priv = dev->data->dev_private;
> > + if (!(priv->representor || priv->master))
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + if (es_domain_id)
> > + *es_domain_id = priv->domain_id;
> > + if (es_port_id)
> > + *es_port_id = priv->vport_id;
>
> It is okay for now but we need to define a new struct like esw_info next time.
> This info should be grouped in the priv.
>
I think I need a new member to mark it is pf or vd, can we in this patch set
add it as is?
I will create a patch to move all of the E-Switch variables to dedicated
structure for next version.
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > * Get switch information associated with network interface.
> > *
> > * @param ifindex
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > index 9f47fd4..85954c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow.h
> > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@
> >
> > /* General pattern items bits. */
> > #define MLX5_FLOW_ITEM_METADATA (1u << 16)
> > +#define MLX5_FLOW_ITEM_PORT_ID (1u << 17)
> >
> > /* Outer Masks. */
> > #define MLX5_FLOW_LAYER_OUTER_L3 \
> > @@ -118,6 +119,10 @@
> > (MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_DROP | MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_QUEUE | \
> > MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_RSS | MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_JUMP)
> >
> > +#define MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ESWITCH_ACTIONS \
> > + (MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_DROP | MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_PORT_ID | \
> > + MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_JUMP)
> > +
> > #define MLX5_FLOW_ENCAP_ACTIONS
> (MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_VXLAN_ENCAP | \
> > MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_NVGRE_ENCAP | \
> > MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_RAW_ENCAP)
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c
> b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c
> > index 7b582f0..fedc6cb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_flow_dv.c
> > @@ -613,6 +613,92 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > + * Validate vport item.
> > + *
> > + * @param[in] dev
> > + * Pointer to the rte_eth_dev structure.
> > + * @param[in] item
> > + * Item specification.
> > + * @param[in] attr
> > + * Attributes of flow that includes this item.
> > + * @param[in] item_flags
> > + * Bit-fields that holds the items detected until now.
> > + * @param[out] error
> > + * Pointer to error structure.
> > + *
> > + * @return
> > + * 0 on success, a negative errno value otherwise and rte_errno is set.
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +flow_dv_validate_item_port_id(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > + const struct rte_flow_item *item,
> > + const struct rte_flow_attr *attr,
> > + uint64_t item_flags,
> > + struct rte_flow_error *error)
> > +{
> > + const struct rte_flow_item_port_id *spec = item->spec;
> > + const struct rte_flow_item_port_id *mask = item->mask;
> > + const struct rte_flow_item_port_id switch_mask = {
> > + .id = 0xffffffff,
> > + };
> > + uint16_t esw_domain_id;
> > + uint16_t item_port_esw_domain_id;
> > + uint16_t item_port_esw_port_id;
> > + uint16_t port;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (!attr->transfer)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
> > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> > + NULL,
> > + "match on port id is valid for"
> > + " eswitch only");
>
> Need to mention about 'transfer' flag here instead of esw. BTW, is it okay to
> speak in PMD specific language for error messages? Even if so, 'eswitch'
> should
> be fixed. Please re-visit all the error messages again.
>
I think the correct message should be that the eswitch should be replaced by
E-Switch
Other option is to say something like this "matching on port id must have the
transfer attribute"
Which do you prefer?
> > + if (item_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ITEM_PORT_ID)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM,
> item,
> > + "multiple source vport are not"
> > + " supported");
>
> Same here. 'vport' doesn't look appropriate.
>
Will change from vport to ports.
> > + if (!mask)
> > + mask = &switch_mask;
> > + if (mask->id && mask->id != 0xffffffff)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM_MASK,
> > + mask,
> > + "no support for partial mask on"
> > + " \"id\" field");
> > + ret = mlx5_flow_item_acceptable
> > + (item, (const uint8_t *)mask,
> > + (const uint8_t
> *)&rte_flow_item_port_id_mask,
> > + sizeof(struct rte_flow_item_port_id),
> > + error);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + if (!spec)
> > + return 0;
> > + port = mask->id ? spec->id : 0;
>
> Non-masked value means 'any' value. Is it correct to set port 0 in
> this case?
>
Will check again.
> > + ret = mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(port, &item_port_esw_domain_id,
> > + &item_port_esw_port_id);
>
> item_port_esw_port_id is of no use here;
>
Will remove the variable.
> > + if (ret)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, -ret,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM_SPEC, spec,
> > + "failed to obtain eswitch info for"
> > + " port");
> > + ret = mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(dev->data->port_id,
> > + &esw_domain_id, NULL);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, -ret,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
> > + NULL,
> > + "failed to obtain eswitch info");
> > + if (item_port_esw_domain_id != esw_domain_id)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, -ret,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ITEM_SPEC, spec,
> > + "cannot match on a port from a"
> > + " different eswitch");
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > * Validate count action.
> > *
> > * @param[in] dev
> > @@ -622,6 +708,7 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > *
> > * @return
> > * 0 on success, a negative errno value otherwise and rte_errno is set.
> > + * w
>
> What is this change?
>
Will fix
> > */
> > static int
> > flow_dv_validate_action_count(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > @@ -676,7 +763,7 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> NULL,
> > "can only have a single encap or"
> > " decap action in a flow");
> > - if (attr->ingress)
> > + if (!attr->transfer && attr->ingress)
> > return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> >
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_INGRESS,
> > NULL,
> > @@ -761,7 +848,8 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > "can only have a single encap"
> > " action in a flow");
> > /* encap without preceding decap is not supported for ingress */
> > - if (attr->ingress && !(action_flags &
> MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_RAW_DECAP))
> > + if (!attr->transfer && attr->ingress &&
> > + !(action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_RAW_DECAP))
> > return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> >
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_INGRESS,
> > NULL,
> > @@ -1561,6 +1649,77 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Validate the port_id action.
> > + *
> > + * @param[in] dev
> > + * Pointer to rte_eth_dev structure.
> > + * @param[in] action_flags
> > + * Bit-fields that holds the actions detected until now.
> > + * @param[in] action
> > + * Port_id RTE action structure.
> > + * @param[in] attr
> > + * Attributes of flow that includes this action.
> > + * @param[out] error
> > + * Pointer to error structure.
> > + *
> > + * @return
> > + * 0 on success, a negative errno value otherwise and rte_errno is set.
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +flow_dv_validate_action_port_id(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> > + uint64_t action_flags,
> > + const struct rte_flow_action *action,
> > + const struct rte_flow_attr *attr,
> > + struct rte_flow_error *error)
> > +{
> > + const struct rte_flow_action_port_id *port_id;
> > + uint16_t port;
> > + uint16_t esw_domain_id;
> > + uint16_t act_port_domain_id;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (!attr->transfer)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
> > + NULL,
> > + "port id action is valid in transfer"
> > + " mode only");
> > + if (!action || !action->conf)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION_CONF,
> > + NULL,
> > + "port id action parameters must be"
> > + " specified");
> > + if (action_flags & (MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ACTIONS |
> > + MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ESWITCH_ACTIONS))
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
> > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> NULL,
> > + "can have only one fate actions in"
> > + " a flow");
> > + ret = mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(dev->data->port_id,
> > + &esw_domain_id, NULL);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, -ret,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
> > + NULL,
> > + "failed to obtain eswitch info");
> > + port_id = action->conf;
> > + port = port_id->original ? dev->data->port_id : port_id->id;
> > + ret = mlx5_port_to_eswitch_info(port, &act_port_domain_id, NULL);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, -ret,
> > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION_CONF,
> port_id,
> > + "failed to obtain eswitch port-id for port");
> > + if (act_port_domain_id != esw_domain_id)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, -ret,
> > + RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION, NULL,
> > + "port does not belong to"
> > + " eswitch being configured");
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> >
> > /**
> > * Find existing modify-header resource or create and register a new one.
> > @@ -1759,11 +1918,34 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> >
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_PRIORITY,
> > NULL,
> > "priority out of range");
> > - if (attributes->transfer)
> > - return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > -
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_TRANSFER,
> > - NULL,
> > - "transfer is not supported");
> > + if (attributes->transfer) {
> > + if (!priv->config.dv_eswitch_en)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
> > + NULL,
> > + "eswitch dr is not supported");
>
> If you open a parenthesis in a new line, you should indent by a tab.
>
Missed that, fill fix.
> > + if (!(priv->representor || priv->master))
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, EINVAL,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_UNSPECIFIED,
> > + NULL,
> > + "eswitch configurationd can only be"
> > + " done by a master or a representor"
> > + " device");
> > + if (attributes->egress)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_EGRESS,
> > + attributes, "egress is not supported");
> > + if (attributes->group >= MLX5_MAX_TABLES_FDB)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set
> > + (error, EINVAL,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR_TRANSFER,
> > + NULL,
> > + "group must be smaller than "
> > + RTE_STR(MLX5_MAX_FDB_TABLES));
> > + }
> > if (!(attributes->egress ^ attributes->ingress))
> > return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ATTR,
> NULL,
> > @@ -1812,6 +1994,13 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > switch (items->type) {
> > case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_VOID:
> > break;
> > + case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_PORT_ID:
> > + ret = flow_dv_validate_item_port_id
> > + (dev, items, attr, item_flags, error);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > + item_flags |= MLX5_FLOW_ITEM_PORT_ID;
> > + break;
>
> Shouldn't it use last_item?
>
Good question, should the port id be in some specific order?
We can force it to be first or last the which makes sense.
I will change to last_item.
> > case RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_ETH:
> > ret = mlx5_flow_validate_item_eth(items, item_flags,
> > error);
> > @@ -1943,6 +2132,17 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > switch (actions->type) {
> > case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_VOID:
> > break;
> > + case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_PORT_ID:
> > + ret = flow_dv_validate_action_port_id(dev,
> > + action_flags,
> > + actions,
> > + attr,
> > + error);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + action_flags |= MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_PORT_ID;
> > + ++actions_n;
> > + break;
> > case RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_FLAG:
> > ret = mlx5_flow_validate_action_flag(action_flags,
> > attr, error);
> > @@ -2133,10 +2333,40 @@ struct field_modify_info modify_tcp[] = {
> > "action not supported");
> > }
> > }
> > - if (!(action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ACTIONS) && attr->ingress)
> > - return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
> > - RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> actions,
> > - "no fate action is found");
> > + /* Eswitch has few restrictions on using items and actions */
> > + if (attr->transfer) {
> > + if (action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_FLAG)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + NULL,
> > + "unsupported action FLAG");
> > + if (action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_MARK)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + NULL,
> > + "unsupported action MARK");
> > + if (action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_QUEUE)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + NULL,
> > + "unsupported action
> QUEUE");
> > + if (action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_ACTION_RSS)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, ENOTSUP,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + NULL,
> > + "unsupported action RSS");
> > + if (!(action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ESWITCH_ACTIONS))
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + actions,
> > + "no fate action is found");
> > + } else {
> > + if (!(action_flags & MLX5_FLOW_FATE_ACTIONS) && attr-
> >ingress)
> > + return rte_flow_error_set(error, EINVAL,
> > +
> RTE_FLOW_ERROR_TYPE_ACTION,
> > + actions,
> > + "no fate action is found");
> > + }
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
